POINTS OE COmOYEESY, 

A 

SERIES OF LECTURES. 



BY 

REV. C. F. SMARIUS, 

MISSIONARY OF THE SOCIETX OF JEStTS. 



TWENTY-SEVENTH THOUSAND. 



JOHN GILMAEY SHEA, 

116 FULTON STEEET. 

1869. 



Entered according to Act of Congross, in the year 1865, 
By C. F. SMAEIUS, 
In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the 
Southern District of New York. 



DREW THEOLOGICAL 
SEMINARY LIBRAHV. 



MN 24 i908 



PREFACE. 



The little volume whicli we present to the 
American public, in the form of doctrinal lec- 
tures, was written for no other purpose, than, 
with the assistance of Divine Grace, to convert 
souls to God. Our missionary experience has 
taught us, that though by no means necessary, 
a plain, simple work like the present, may 
prove useful to a great ninnber of Catholics, 
Protestants, and Indifferentists in religion, who 
treat books as they do the fashions, dropping 
one to adopt another, almost every season. 
There is no lack of short controversial works 
in our Catholic Theological literature, and 
most of those that are before the public, have, 
doubtless, more intrinsic merit than our lec- 
tures. Yet zeal prompts us to add these to 
the stock, in the hope that they may find a few 
readers, to whom they may prove of some 



4 



PEEFACE. 



spiritual service. We shall consider ourselves 
amply rewarded for our labor, if they become in- 
strumental in leading even one soul to abjure 
error and embrace tlie truth as it is in Christ 
Jesus. 

Alas ! how many millions of our fellow men, 
redeemed by the precious blood of the Saviour, 
are daily lost to the Church and to Heaven, who, 
if we exerted ourselves a little more in their 
behalf, might be rescued from darkness and the 
shadow of eternal death ! How much could be 
done towards converting our countrymen, if 
we Catholics joined works of zeal and charity 
to fervent prayer! If we were untiring in 
our efforts to spread instruction and useful 
books, tracts, and pamphlets among them, as 
an antidote against the many slanderous pub- 
lications which are put forth in hostility to us. 
How much sinful ignorance would be removed 
from among the children of the Church them- 
selves, if, instead of subscribing to and pur- 
chasing the trivial and often pernicious ro- 
mances and periodicals of the day, they were 
to buy and read a few good books of Catholic 



PEEFACE. 5 

literature, and make them their delight and 
study. 

Always willing to learn and improve by the 
wisdom and experience of others, we beg all 
those who will read these Lectures, to suggest 
to us, either publicly or privately, whatever 
additions or corrections they may deem neces- 
sary or useful, so that we may insert them in 
a second edition, or add them to the second 
volume, which, if this succeeds, we intend soon 
to publish. 

In conclusion, we wish to place our little 
book under the protection and care of the ever 
Immaculate Yirgin Mary, Mother of God, and 
Patroness of the infant Church in the United 
States of America, and we beg her to bless it, 
its author, and its readers. 

CmjKCH of the Holy Family, 
Chicago, ni. 



CONTENTS. 



Leot. Pagb 
I. Indiffekence rcT Reugiok 7 

n. The Bible not the Rule of Faith 50 

ni. The Church of Christ 109 

IV. The Roman Catholic Chuech, the Church 

OF Christ 170 

V. Confession 243 

VI. On Purgatory and Indulgences 296 

Vn. On the Real Presence 343 

VIII. Honor and Invocation of Saints, Vene- 
ration OF Images and Relics 411 

IX. On the Honor and Inyocation of the 
Blessed Virgin Mary 453 



I. 



INDIFFEEENCE IN EELIGION. 

" Without faith it is impossible to please God." Heb. xi. 6. 

LmDELiTT and a general indifference to all 
religion are the characteristic traits of our age. 
The great and fierce battles of error against 
truth, that marked the years immediately fol- 
lowing the so-called Reformation, have ceased, 
and have been succeeded by a false, delusive 
peace. A fatal lethargy has come over the minds 
and hearts of men, in which religion, virtue, 
duty, are looked upon as empty phantoms in a 
dream, leaving a momentary impression of their 
beauty, but soon to be forgotten in the more 
attractive and absorbing interests of daily life. 
While we boast of the triumphs of genius over 
matter, and point to a thousand inventions and 
discoveries that minister to our carnal wants, 
and carnal pleasures, we are silent on the fearful 
ravages which a total apathy to our higher and 
more lasting interests, has made in our midst 
"We have established lines of communication 



8 



nmrFFERENCE m KELTGION. 



with the most distant nations of the earth, but 
we have ceased to commune with Heaven. 
Our merchant vessels are laden with the riches 
of every land, but the barque of our soul is 
without cargo or ballast, tossed to and fro by 
every wind of error and passion. Our schools 
and academies, our colleges and universities, 
impart the highest instruction in every branch 
of human knowledge, but the science of God 
and revelation, the science of the saints, is ban- 
ished from the class-room, and the professor's 
chair. We are becoming a Godless people. 

A chief cause of this moral degeneracy may 
be traced to the principle of private judgment 
introduced by Luther and Calvin, as the high- 
est and only authority in religion and morality. 
Since the time of these Reformers, religion 
ceased to be the mistress, and became the slave 
of man. He was no longer bound to obey her, 
but she was bound to obey him. His reason 
was no longer subject to her divine authority, 
but she became subject to his prejudices and 
passions. The Scriptures, although cried up aa 
the supreme authority, lost their objective 
value, and men no longer listened to the words, 
"Thus saith the Lord," but gave ear to the 
freaks and fancies of every upstart prophet and 
doctor, whose best reason for the faith that was in 



INDIFFEEENCE IN BELIGION. 



9 



hinij was, " I believe so " It is my impression 
" It is my opinion." Eeason itself was soon 
dethroned, and feeling became the exponent of 
truth. Men judged of religion as they did oi 
their breakfasts and dinners. This was true, 
and that was false, because they liked the one 
and dislil^ed the other. They felt religion as 
they felt heat and cold, and behaved accord- 
ingly. New fashions of belief became as 
numerous as new fashions of dress. Every 
year, every month, produced a new one, which 
in its turn was succeeded by another still more 
recent. Oneness in faith and union of believers 
became impossibilities. Confessions and cate- 
chisms of doctrines, councils, and synods, read- 
ing recreant members out of church, excommu- 
nicating false teachers, and heterodox believers, 
could not stay the individualizing process of 
this principle. The most ignorant saw that 
such restraints upon their personal liberties 
were evident contradictions of the first princi- 
ple introduced by the innovators. Had not 
every individual the same privilege as his 
neighbor to read the Bible, and interpret it as 
best he could, by the aid of his private judg- 
ment ? "Was the Spirit exclusive in his opera- 
tions on the soul that wished to get religion 
from the common book of faith ? What right 



10 mDrFFEEENCE m EELIGIOIT. 



had Luther to denounce the Anabaptists as het- 
erodox ? What right had Calvin to burn Ser- 
vetns for opinions, which he also had conscien- 
tionsiy drawn from the pages of the inspired 
volume ? A shoe-black was as much entitled 
as the learned doctor of Wittenberg, or the 
profound thinker of Geneva, to tell the world 
what he understood by the mystery of the 
Trinity, the incarnation of the Word, the 
predestination of the just and the wicked, and 
all the other dogmas of faith. 

Toleration was the necessary result of the 
principle established. Not a mere toleration 
of opinion, preventing physical violence and 
persecution, leaving every one to worship God 
according to the dictates of his own conscience ; 
but a toleration which approved all, even the 
most glaring contradictions in faith, as the 
working of one and the same Spirit of truth, 
who was given differently to different individ- 
uals, according to their religious capacities and 
wants. Free from all external restraint, bound 
no longer by councils, synods, confessions, or 
catechisms, individual religion became natu- 
rally invisible. It remained confined within the 
chambers of the mind. This gave rise to the 
idea of an invisible Church, and of course of an 
unseen faith, which although unknown to earllij 



mDrFFEEENCE IN EELIGION. 11 



was watched with peculiar interest in Heaven. 
Bnt how was this invisible Church to be known 
even as invisible ? That which cannot be seen 
by the eye of the body, nor the eye of the mind, 
must needs remain in impenetrable darkness. 
The common sense of the people was not slow 
in discovering the absurdity and the contradic- 
tion. But what was the remedy ? There was 
none ! Public authority was banished ; indi- 
vidual faith had retired into privacy ; the Bible 
truths were the property of each subjective 
understanding; apathy and indifference suc- 
ceeded, as the natural consequences of a princi- 
ple which dissolved all union among the mem- 
bers of the same faith, and all the obligations 
which spring from such a union. The edu- 
cated, the talented among them, looked upon 
religion as a sham ; and the vulgar, the illiter- 
ate, as a thing beyond the reach of their under- 
standing. The Eeformation ended in infidelity 
and indifference to all forms of faith and re- 
ligion. 

This is no unwarranted assertion of our own. 
Protestant writers bear ample testimony to its 
truth. Beckendorf writes that "there is no 
Church among his brethren, but merely parties ; 
the old Church is in ruinsP Ball says : " The 
dissolution of the Protestant Church is certain ; 



12 INDirTEEENCE m EELIGIOK. 

the "Hallisclie Literatar Zeitung" declares 
that " there is no Protestant Church, but only 
Protestant churches " One sees Protestant- 
ism," says Professor Schwann, " but no Protest- 
ant Church;" Schlegei avers, that, of the great- 
est part of the Evangelical churches, it may be 
doubted whether they make any pretence to 
the name of Christian Church. 

The " Gazette" of Berlin, in Prussia, wrote 
a few years ago : " It is easy to prove, yea, it 
has been proved more than once, that there is 
not one of all our pastors, who believes what 
another believes." " They are all laughed at 
as so many false prophets." (Ludke). " The 
people seeing their contradictions, treat their 
guides as imbeciles and impostors." (Fischer). 
" We unhesitatingly affirm," says Dr. Planck, 
"that there is not one theologian among us, 
who has not renounced some important point 
of faith, considered important by the Eeform- 
ers." '*The Antichristian spirit shows an open 
front ; . . . the Bible is shamefully interpret- 
ted ; . . . our universities increase the evil." 
(John Mdller). " Satan himself," says Ewald, 
" has more faith than many of our Biblical in- 
terpreters, and Mohammed was much better 
than they." " The decadence of religion," ex- 
claims Kirchaff, "in all Protestant countries, is 



INDIFFEEENCE m EELIGION. 13 



but too evident." "JSTot tlie higher classes 
alone, but the people also," writes Bickel, 
" plunge daily more and more into religious in- 
differentism." "We are come to that pass," 
wrote the " Theological Jom-nal," in 1830, 
that if the middle classes are not yet despoiled 
of every moral habit, the religious spirit, at 
least, has completely forsaken them." " The 
Lutheran Church," says Frceseisen, " resembles, 
as to its different factions, a worm cut up into 
a thousand pieces, every one of which stirs so 
long as it retains the least particle of life, but 
ends by dying." (Discourse at Strasburg). The 
same infidelity and indifference have paralyzed 
the Calvinistic Church of Switzerland. Vernet's 
system of theology, which denies the divinity 
of Jesus Christ, is the standard work used in 
their university. " Believe anything you like 
of Jesus Christ," said he to his theological 
students, " but do not believe him to be God." 
(Sketch of Religious Discussions). No wonder 
that the people should re-echo the voice of 
such masters, and exclaim in the very Greets, 
" down with Jesus Christ." 

Pass over to France, — you hear the same 
words of wailing from the lips of the Protestant 
leaders. " We had a Church," writes Edmond 
Schever, " we have now only churches. We 



14 INDrFFEKENCE IN EELIGION. 



were a Eeformed Cliurcli, we are so no longer. 
Its name now adorns only a mutilated phan- 
tom!' (Present State of the Eeformed Church 
in France). The Foreign Aid Society's Eeport, 
read in IS^l, as follows : " A few years ago, it 
was hardly possible to find twenty pasteurs^ 
^^ho confessed the doctrines of the Trinity and 
^.tenement. At present. Protestantism in 
France is, for the most part,Socinianism." 

The third volume of the " Scottish Christian 
Herald" (p. 51-54), informs ns that " of Protest- 
ant ministers who, in Belgium, afford religious 
instruction to thirteen different congregations, 
there are only four who know the truth ; the 
rest, being either Eationalists or Socinians, hate 
it with their whole hearts !" 

Speaking of Sweden, Norway and Finland, 
Robert Haldane says, that, " Though the tide 
of infidelity reached these JSTorthern countries 
more slowly, its advent was none the less dis- 
astrous. The faith of the people was every- 
where overturned by the preachers of hu- 
manity sent forth by the infidel University 
of Copenhagen. At present, one may travel 
through these countries, and, perhaps not find 
anything like the Gospel in parishes.'^ 
(E. Haldane's second review of the Conduct of 
the Directors of Brit, and' For. Bible Society, 



INDIFFEKEiq^CE EST EELIGIOIT. 



15 



Edin., 1826-1861.) We all know wliat havoc 
mdifferentism has made in England and onr 
ovm country. Protestantism is no longer a 
protest against the religion of Eome, but 
against all religion. Positive dogmatism is 
no longer its attribute. It has lost the very 
few pieces of the seamless garment which it 
took along, at its first separation, and which it 
appeared willing to preserve, when it robbed 
the Catholic Church of some thousands of its 
nominal believers. Its ministers and doctors 
dare no longer preach or teach any article of 
faith, which the people are likely to disown, as 
uncongenial to their prejudices and feelings. 
Every minister who would be heard, must 
first feel the pulse of the audience to which he 
preaches the Gospel. Opposition to the sover- 
eign wiU of the dear people in matters of faith 
and morals, is as sure to meet with contempt, 
as opposition in political matters. Every 
preacher is the creature of his congregation 
more thoroughly than every representative 
is the creature of his constituents. The 
awful truths, "He that belie veth not shall be 
damned;" " Without Faith it is impossible to 
please God " One Faith, one Baptism," are 
heard no longer in the general assembly, or 
fi-om the pulpit ; but instead of them, the soft, 



16 INDIFFEEENCE IN EELIGION, 



flattering maxims, Believe what you tMnk 
fit " Suit yourselves " We shall all come 
right in the end." 

Add to this intellectual apathy the no less 
general disregard of all moral obligation oi 
restraint, which increases in proportion as faith 
loses its hold upon the people. Its causes also 
lie in the principles set down by the first Re- 
formers. Disappointed pride generally seeks 
refuge in the gratification of the senses. The 
idolatry of the intellect is succeeded by the 
deification of the flesh. The worship of gods 
and demigods is followed by the worship of the 
passions. Often they go hand in hand to- 
gether. The flesh is a powerful antagonist of 
the spirit, and fights as unrelentingly for its 
pretended rights as does the intellect. Hence 
the Reformers could not separate the one from 
the other. The same pens that wrote in favor 
of the rights of reason, as the judge of truth 
and falsehood, also wrote that man has lost his 
free will, and that it is impossible even for the 
just, to observe the commandments. Tea 
more, they made God the author of evil, the 
mover and impeller to sin : so that the voca- 
tion of Paul to the apostleship among the Gen- 
tiles, and the adultery of David, were alike the 
work of God.(C9iemnitz, Loc TheoL Ed, Leyser, 



INDIFFEEEKCE IN EELIGION. 17 



1615, p. 173. Zwingle, De Providentia, torn, i., 
c. yi. Calvin's Institutes, lib. iv., c. 18, § 2. 
Beza, Aphorism, xxii.). It is not diflScult 
to see wliat an injurions influence such, a 
doctrine must have had on the morality of 
the individual and of society. If, said the 
logical youth, my sins are not my own ; if God 
is their author, why should I have faith any 
more than justice or purity ? Tea, the con- 
clusions derivable from these principles were 
carried further still. The Infidels, Spiritual- 
ists, and other Freethinkers of our day, have 
deduced from them : that there is no moral evil 
in the world ; that all that is, is right ; that 
physical evils are the only obstacles to man's 
happiness ; that true virtue consists in obeying 
the voice of nature and the impulses of the 
heart. 

Such is the lamentable condition to which 
many have come in our age and country. We 
ourselves have met several who had fallen into 
this deplorable abyss of mental and moral 
degradation. Can anything be done to remedy 
this evil ? "We must return to first principles, 
and from them deduce the obligations which 
have been disowned, the duties which have 
been neglected. This we shall endeavor to do 
in the following lectm*es. 

2* • 



18 rroiFTEEENCE m eeligion. 



There is a God ; " the heavens and the earth 
are fall of his glory." "The firmament on 
high is His beauty. . . . The snn, when 
he appeareth, showing forth at his rising, an 
admirable instrument, the work of the Most 
High. . . . Great is the Lord that made 
Him. . . . The glory of the stars is the 
beauty of heaven; the Lord enlightened the 
world on high. . . . By the words of the 
Holy One they shall stand in judgment, and 
shall never fail in their watches. Look upon 
the rainbow and bless Him that made it ; it is 
very beautiful in its brightness. He encom- 
passeth the heaven about, with the cu'cle of its 
glory. The hands of the Most High have dis- 
played it. . . . What shall we be able to do to 
glorify Him? For the Almighty Himself is 
above all His works." (Ecclus. xliii.) 

"What shall we be able to do to glorify 
Him ?" We shall fall down before Him and 
adore Him. This is our first, our reasonable, 
our necessary duty. If there is a God, and 
that God created us, as well as all things that 
exist, we are bound to acknowledge the rela- 
tion in which we stand to Him. Now, we 
know and believe that it is not we ourselves 
who made ourselves, but that His hands have 
made us and formed us. God, then, is our 



INDIFFERENCE IN EELIGIOK. 19 



first beginning. He it is who "formed tlie 
eye and planted the ear" (Ps. xciii. 9) : He 
who "fashioned ns wholly round about" (Job 
X. 8) : He who " formed man of the slime of 
the earth, and breathed into his face the breath 
of life, and man became a living soul!' (Gen. 
u. 7). "We are beholden to God for all that we 
are; and are therefore dependent on Him. 
Moreover, the same cause that made us, pre- 
serves our existence. "Without His almighty 
power and infinite goodness, we should fall 
back into the nothing out of which He drew 
us. As our Creator and Preserver, His do- 
minion over His creatures is absolute and uni- 
versal. He has all and every right over the 
works of His own divine hands. His first 
right is, that a free but dependent creature 
should acknowledge this dependence on Him. 
If the heavens and the earth themselves, 
after their own way, confess His wonders (Ps. 
Ixxxviii. 6) ; if from the earth the dragons, all 
the deeps, fire, hail, snow, ice, stormy winds, 
praise Him and fulfill His word (Ps. cxlviii. 7), 
how much more should man, who is created in 
Elis own image and likeness, praise and serve 
the Lord his God ? If they, after their man- 
ner, adore and worship Him as their sovereign" 
Lord, how much more should man ? 



20 INDUTEEENCE IN RELIGION. 



As God is onr first beginning, so is He also 
our last end. He proposeth to Himself an end 
worthy of Himself in creating the nniyerse 
and man. That end could be no other than 
Himself. The infinite cannot subject itself to 
the finite, the limitless to the limited — ^the 
eternal to that which is passing — the immuta- 
ble to the ever changing — the perfect to that 
which is essentially imperfect. Nor can man 
exist for the finite and limited creatures of 
time. Endowed with an intellect which is 
created for truth, and a heart which is made 
for good, man, although finite in nature, tends 
to the possession of infinite truth and infinite 
good, and by so doing recognizes the infinite 
truth and good, as worthy of a higher love 
than any limited truth and good. This is in- 
terior worship, and includes only acts peculiar 
to the mind and heart. But since the whole 
man, body and soul, depends on his Maker and 
his last end, he must acknowledge that double 
' dependence by acts corresponding to the nature 
of his compound beiag. His body, then, must 
manifest, after its own way, its entire depend- 
ence on the God that made it, so that man 
must adore his Creator, by acts of external 
as weU as internal worship. And as man is a 
Bocial being, his external acts of worship must 



rNDIFFEEEKCE IK EELIGIOK. 21 



necessarily come under the observation of tlie 
society of which he is a member. 

God, to be worshipped as He deserves, must 
be known to the worshipper. How could man 
otherwise tend to God as his last end ? We 
do not desire what is unknown to ns. Our in- 
tellect, therefore, must study the nature of the 
Deity and His attributes, both to satisfy its in- 
finite longings after the truth, and to furnish 
the will with the means by which it can reach 
the goal to which it tends, and for which it is 
created. Religion is that means ; for its object 
is to make us acquainted with the nature of the 
Deity, the relations in which we stand to Him, 
and He to us, and consequently the obligations 
which flow from those relations. 

Human reason can, absolutely speakings 
know that there is a being, which is Eternal, 
Omnipotent, Supreme, Infinitely Perfect, and 
that man owes Him worship and adoration; 
and the human will can, absolutely speaking, 
practise the obligations, which flow from the 
knowledge of our relations to God, — ^yet all 
history and experience teach us that, in point 
of fact, the one, unaided by revelation, has 
never understood the full extent of these 
truths, nor the other, unassisted by grace, ever 
practised the obligations which these truths 



22 nmrFFERENCE m religion. 



naturally entail. Scarcely was Adam banished 
from the delightful garden of Paradise, when 
those truths, which he beheld in all their 
beauty, and faithfully carried out in practice 
before his fall, were obscured in the minds of 
his children. The most absurd and contradic- 
tory notions of a Deity, and His attributes, be- 
gan to prevail. The pure worship of the one 
true and living God was gradually abandoned, 
and idolatry and superstition succeeded in its 
stead. Not only the vulgar crowd, the illiter- 
ate multitude, but the most learned sages, the 
profoundest philosophers, the acutest lawgiv- 
ers, the most prominent statesmen, orators and 
poets, lost sight of the true God, and indulged 
in the most ludicrous and revolting religious 
practices. Not one of them, from Confucius 
and Lao-Tsee, in China, to Cicero and Seneca, 
in Home, was able to give the world a natural 
theology or moral philosophy which answered 
all the wants of mind and heart. The works 
of the best of them teem with errors and ab- 
surdities. Nor could they, on the hypothesis 
that they had taught the whole truth concern- 
ing God and man, and the relations which ex- 
ist between them, have succeeded in acquainting 
the world at large, with what they th selves 
knew, or in enforcing the obligations which 



mDIFFEEEITCE m EELIGION. 



23 



they deduced from that knowledge. To suc- 
ceed iu tMs, they should have had it in their 
power to communicate the talent necessary to 
fathom these truths and obligations, and the 
moral force to put them into practice. This 
they could not impart. Meanwhile, error as- 
serted its right to dogmatize, and passion to be 
gratified and indulged. How could then* most 
l]f.c\d demonstrations check the arrogance of 
the one, and the powerful impulses of the 
other, without the interposition of a higher in- 
fluence ? No wonder, therefore, that Plato ex- 
claimed, " A teacher is necessary, but no one 
will teach us, unless a God lead the way." 

That teacher came, that God appeared and 
showed us the way. He gave us a revelation 
from Heaven. That revelation is twofold. In 
the first place, it consists of those truths which 
reason alone could, strictly speaking, know 
without this special assistance, such as the ex- 
istence of God, His eternity, providence, the 
immortality of the soul, the reward of virtue, 
and punishment due to vice. These truths are 
supernatural through revelation, not as to their 
objective verity, but as to the manner in which 
they are made known. Secondly, it comprises 
truths which transcend the natural powers of 
reason, and the revelation of which is super- 



24 



INDrFFEEENCE m BELIGIOlir. 



natural as to tlieir substance and their manner. 
Such, for example, is the truth that God is one 
in essence and three in person. Such truths, 
because they lie out of the natural capacity of 
liimian reason, are called mysteries. Since, 
. then, there were truths which reason, unaided 
by revelation, could not possibly think of, much 
less understand, even after they were revealed 
as to their intrinsic nature or manner of exist- 
ence, it was necessary that God should attest 
the fact of His having revealed such truths by 
unmistakable evidences, such evidences as would 
convince the reason of man that He truly re- 
vealed them. 

These evidences He did give to man, and 
they consist of miracles and prophecies. A 
miracle is a sensible effect, at variance with 
the known laws of nature, and produced in 
confirmation of a certain doctrine. A prophecy 
is a certain prediction of an event which can- 
. not possibly be foreseen in natural causes, and is 
uttered likewise in attestation of a certain truth. 

Such miracles and prophecies transcending, 
as they do, all the known powers of created 
nature, can be the work of God alone. When- 
ever, therefore, they occur in confirmation oi 
the truth of revelation, that revelation is there- 
by proved to be Divine, if there remains no 



INDHTirBENCE IN EELTGION. 25 



solid reason to deny it after tlie revelation is 
made. But there can be no solid reason when 
the truth which the miracle attests is not evi- 
dently contradictory to any other well known 
tnith of reason or of revelation, and when there 
is nothing in the manner of proposing the 
truth, nor in the end for which it is made, or 
in other cu'cumstances, which could make it 
improbable. 

Now, that such miracles have been wrought 
and prophecies uttered in attestation of the rev- 
elation made by God to man, is a well known 
fact of history. 

The pages of the Old and New Testaments 
abound with miraculous facts and prophecies. 
The blind see, the lame walk, the dead rise 
from their graves, in confirmation of the doc- 
trines which are there recorded. We are bound 
to accept revelations thus attested as the reve- 
lations of God Himself. 

For, when God reveals any truth, whether 
of a speculative or practical nature. He must 
needs do so for an end. This end can be no 
other than His greater glory and our greater 
happiness. Both these motives oblige us to 
accept and believe His revelation. Has He 
not a perfect right to be known, to be rever- 
enced, served, and adored as He pleases ? 
3 



26 INDIFFEEEKCE IN EELIGION. 



To withhold that tribute of our mind and heart, 
is to insult His sovereign dominion over our 
whole being. Zeal for our own happiness im- 
pels US to make use of those means which will 
most certainly and infallibly realize that happi- 
ness. But among these means none is more 
necessary than a correct knowledge of God, and 
of the duties which we owe Him as our first 
beginning and last end. Religion is the only 
adequate guide to this knowledge. Hence the 
necessity of admitting religion is as great as the 
necessity of attaining our happiness itself. 
Faith, therefore, in the doctrine of Divine rev- 
elation, is necessary unto our real well-being 
for time and for eternity. 

But this revelation is essentially one in its 
nature. God is infinite and infallible Truth. 
He cannot be deceived Himself, nor can He 
deceive us in the revelation of His truths. All, 
then, are bound to believe the revelation made 
in the one only sense in which it was made. 
Different faiths in one and the same revelation 
are an evident contradiction. 

It is not true, that all religions are equaljy^ac- 
ceptable to God. To predicate such absurdity 
of God is to blaspheme His name and to de- 
stroy His very nature. To believe God's word 
otherwise than as it lies in His divine mind, is 



rroiETEEENCE m EELIGIOK. 



27 



to believe God to be different from, and contra- 
dictory to Himself. God is the truth: He 
cannot at the same time be error. God is one : 
He cannot possibly be dirided. To admit that 
truth and error are the same in God is not only 
to place Him in contradiction with Himself, but 
to destroy His very nature. Error excludes 
truth. Put error in God and He will cease to 
be the Truth ; He will cease to be God. 

If all religions are the same, then God can 
be served by error and vice, as well as by truth 
and virtue. For these religions contradict each 
other, both in points of speculative and prac- 
tical doctrines. What the one admits, the other 
denies. What the one prescribes as duty, the 
other forbids as sin. Can it be the same to 
God whether with the Socinian you deny the 
Trinity of persons, or with the Trinitarian 
admit the Triunity of God? Can it be the 
same to the Author of all truth, whether you 
believe, or whether you do not believe, that 
He has predestined some to be damned and 
others to be saved, without any regard whatso- 
ever to their good or evil deeds ? Is it the 
same, whether you believe in the necessity of 
regeneration by baptism, or absolutely deny its 
power to purify the soul ? Is there no distinc- 
tion between the doctrine of Luther — that faith 



28 



rraiFFEEENCE IN EELIGIOIT. 



alone will save a man — and the doctrine of 
those who preach the necessity of good works 
unto salvation? "What kind of God do you 
make to yourselves ? One who delights in all 
possible contradictions; who, like yourself, 
calls truth error, and error truth ; virtue vice, 
and vice virtue ? Truly, such a deity would be 
as absurd a being as Apis and Osiris among the 
Egyptians, Vishnou among the Hindoos, Zeus or 
Jupiter among the Greeks and Eomans. God 
wishes to be worshipped in spirit and in truth, 
but He cannot be worshipped in truth, when the 
religion which commands the worship is false. 

If all religions are equally acceptable to God, 
what will prevent you from embracing and 
rejecting the one after the other. To-day Jew, 
to-morrow Turk, the next day Greek, the 
fourth, ISTestorian, the fifth, Armenian, the sixth, 
Eutychian, the seventh, Abyssinian, the eighth, 
Lutheran, next Calvinist, Anabaptist, Anglican, 
Methodist, Quaker, ITew Jerusalemite, Mormon, 
Spiritist; yea, what forbids you prostrating 
yom^self under the wheels of the Juggernaut, 
instead of falling down before the CiTicifix ? 

Nor is it true that as honesty is the best 
policy, so it is the best religion. Honesty . in 
your sense of the word, is the same as justice, 
but justice is a virtue which gives to every one 



INDIFFERENCE m EELIGION. 



29 



his o\ra. This virtne is not perfect, unless you 
give God His own. Hence, the Eedeemer said : 
"Eender nnto Caesar the things that are 
Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." 
(Matt. xxii. 21.) God has rights over yon, and 
consequently, you have duties towards Him. 
To refuse compliance with those duties is to 
withhold from Him what is His due ; it is to 
be unjust ; to be dishonest. 

From what has been said, you have learned, 
that religion alone can teach us the nature of 
those duties which we owe to God, and that 
the religion which teaches them is necessarily 
one. To know your duties, therefore, you 
must know that religion; and to accomplish 
them, you must follow its commands. Out of 
it, you cannot know them with certainty, be- 
cause all religions out of it are necessarily 
made up of error ; otherwise they would not 
be different from the one true religion. In fol- 
lowing any of them, you follow the dictates 
of error, at least, to a certain extent, and God 
cannot accept the tribute of error with the 
same will with which He receives the homage 
of truth. Tou cannot, therefore, please God 
in any other than the one true religion, which 
He himself has revealed and established upon 
earth. And if the true rehgion is necessary 
3^ 



30 



INDIFFEEENCE IN EELIGION. 



to man's happiness, you cannot possibly be 
happy out of that one, only true religion. 

You boast of your honesty as the best and 
only religion. But honesty is not the only 
virtue, injustice is not the only vice, in the 
code of morality. There are as many vir- 
tues and vices, as there are passions in the 
human breast. Every one of these virtues 
must be practised, every one of these vi- 
ces must be avoided, in order to attain 
happiness. What sanction have you in the 
natural law, for the practice of the one and the 
avoidance of the other? Will you say that 
virtue is her own reward ? True ; but is the 
happiness which follows the consciousness of 
good, and the remorse which follows the con- 
sciousness of evil, a sufficient motive for all? 
Not only does conscience, left to itself, often 
entertain erroneous notions, concerning the 
duties which it is to perform, and the vices 
which it must avoid, but prejudice, interest, 
ambition, and a host of other passions, not un- 
frequently change and pervert all the principles 
of morality on which it should be based. To 
form conscience, to secure it against sophistry 
on the one hand, and passion on the other, you 
need religion, whose principles are the only 
safeguards against error and passion. 



INDIFFERENCE IN RELIGION. 81 



But, we are told, the sanction of virtue is 
in the social laws of nations. They are sufficient 
to make man an honest, upright, moral being, 
such as your religion requires him to be. 

This objection is so directly at variance with 
common sense, and daily experience, that it 
scarcely deserves an answer. For, besides the 
well known fact, that no nation, ancient or 
modem, which attempted to draw up a code 
of laws for the government of its people, in- 
dependently of religion, ever succeeded in 
making thoroughly just and reasonable laws, 
the sanction of them reaches at most only 
public crimes, and virtues. It punishes only 
those transgressions which lie on the surface 
of human depravity, and rewards only those 
virtues which find their way to public notice. 
What becomes, meanwhile, of the countless 
violations of law committed in secret ? How 
do those laws reach the dishonest merchant, 
who, by a thousand ingenious methods, over- 
reaches his neighbor in business ? How do 
they affect the statesman and the magistrate, 
who, with honesty on their lips, practise the 
most outrageous frauds upon the people whom 
they govern ? How do they prevent the private 
quarrels of the family ? How do they check 
the private immorality of passionate youth, the 



32 



INDIFFEBENCE IN EELIGION". 



secret infidelity of wedded love ? These laws 
can indeed, to a certain extent, arrest the pro- 
gress of public disorder ; tliej can repress the 
fury of the madman, who would lift the incen- 
diary torch, or unsheathe the sword of 
vengeance against his fellow- man; they can 
diminish highway robberies, and midnight 
thefts ; bnt they cannot reach the heart or con- 
science of the crafty sconndrel, who plans his 
plots of mischief in the dark, and consummates 
the purpose of his villainy in the attics or cel- 
lars, where dwells the accomplice of his crimes. 

These laws may throw the iron chain, or 
hang the heavy ball, upon the limbs of cul- 
prits ; they may bury the transgressor in the 
gloomy cells of prisons and penitentiaries ; they 
may even make a public example of him, by 
hanging him on a gibbet : but they cannot 
enforce the practice of those virtues which are 
the foundation stones of order, prosperity, and 
happiness, in the family and society. 

They cannot teach the egotist, humanity; 
the drunkard, sobriety ; the idle, industry ; the 
miser, hospitality ; the husband, chastity; the 
wife, fidelity : they cannot check those fearful 
scandals which are the ruin of the innocent, 
and the bane of morality. 

EflScaciously to prevent the commission of 



INDIEFEEENCE IN EELIGION. 33 

crime, and to inculcate the practice of virtue, 
tlie laws of religion must come to the aid of 
the laws of states and governments ; the latter 
must be based on the former, and besides the 
terrors of human vengeance and the hopes oi 
earthly rewards, religion must point out to the 
delinqnent, punishments which end not with 
death, and rewards to the w^ell-doer, which 
survive him in a better and happier world 
The laws of religion alone can form a sound in- 
dividual and social conscience, curb the rest- 
lessness of passion, and create respect for virtue. 
They alone can produce that moral heroism, 
which is willing to sacrifice all — father, mother, 
brother, sister, lands and estates, even life it- 
self, if necessary, to assert the majesty of truth, 
or thie dignity of vu'tue. They alone inspire 
that chivahy which makes a man conquer him- 
self 

" All very well," says the man of business. 
" but let women do the praying, and we shaU 
do the working. A man, after all, must live, 
his family must be provided for ; we cannot 
leave these things to chance." 

In other words, you wish to say that men 
have no need of religion ; that it may be an 
amusement proper for the other sex, but that 
men, who are in the world, and have to work 



34 



IKDIFFEKENCE IN KELIGION. 



in it, discharge all their duties and satisfy their 
conscience, when thej fulfill the obligations 
which spring from their professions or avoca- 
tions in life. Do you really believe what you 
say ? Is man's nature so different from woman's 
that he can claim a special exemption from du- 
ties and obligations which were imposed on 
all ? Though head of the family over which 
he presides, has he no master to whom he owes 
submission and obedience? Though called 
upon by the votes of the people to govern 
states, kingdoms, or empires, is there none 
above him, who calls Himself the King of 
kings, and Lord of lords ? Though generally 
more highly gifted in point of intellect, has his 
reason no need of a guide to prevent him from 
falling into error or into doubt ? Are not his 
f >assions as strong, and his temptations to grat- 
ify them more numerous than those of woman ? 
Does not the same judgment await him, and 
will he be less accountable for his evil deeds, 
merely because he had it in his power to com- 
mit them with greater impunity? "Was not 
the same hell created for the adulterer as for 
the adulteress? Did not the prodigal need the 
conversion which was wrought in the Magdalen? 
Had not Zaccheus need of atoning for his injus- 
tice, the thief upon the cross for his robberies 



INDIFFEKENCE IN KELIGION. 35 

and murders ? Why did St. Paul address the 
men of Athens, who worshipped an unknown 
God, and preach to them the existence of a God 
man, in whose name alone all that are to be, 
must be saved ? Why did the God-man Himself 
denounce the hypocrisy of the Pharisee, and 
the Scribe, and the unbelief of all carnal Jews, 
if there is an exception made in favor of man ? 

True, you have your duties to fulfill with re- 
gard to your wife and children, your patrons, 
your customers, and your clients. But religion, 
far from preventing you from doing so, com- 
mands a scrupulous compliance with them. 
Nor do any of her doctrines or practices inter- 
fere with your domestic or social obligations. 
All she does is to regulate them, to give them 
the proper tendency, to point out the only real 
end for which they were imposed upon you. 
She stimulates activity, moderates excess, sym- 
pathizes with misfortune, removes the causes 
of despair, and opens the way to better hopes 
than those which spring from mere natural suc- 
cess in life. She teaches you how to sanctify 
labor, how to make every drop of sweat a pearl 
in the diadem of unfading glory. 

The great misfortune of our age lies precisely 
in the inversion of the laws of order. We have 
forgotten that man liveth not by bread alone, 



36 



INDIFFERENCE IN RELIGION. 



that the Kingdom of God is not meat and 
drink ; that to be true to ourselves we should 
first seek the Kingdom of God and His justice , 
and, that a kind Providence, which clothes the 
lily of the field, and feeds the little sparrow, 
will add all other things that are really necessary 
or useful to our happiness here below. "We for- 
get that money cannot supply the want of hon- 
esty, and that power does not preclude the ne- 
cessity of submission and humility ; that God 
cannot be bribed by the one, nor intimidated 
by the other ; that He is no accepter of per- 
sons ; that before Him we are all as if we were 
not, a handful of dust and ashes, a leaf which 
is borne away by the wind. We forget that 
we have no lasting resting place below, that 
we are seeking for a city which was not built 
by human hands ; that our Eden was forfeited 
and that invisible cherubim guard the entrance 
against all regress into its delightful bowers. 
We forget the question of the Saviour, " What 
shall it profit a man if he gain the whole world, 
and lose his own soul ? Or what shall a man 
give in exchange for his soul?" (Mark, viii. 36, 
37.) We no longer realize the truth of David's 
exclamation: "What have I in heaven, and 
besides Thee, what do I desire upon earth ? . . . 
It is good for me to adhere to my God, to put 



INDIFFERENCE IN RELIGION. 



37 



my hope in the Lord God." (Ps. Ixxii. 25-28.) 
No, they are not truly happy, " whose sons 
are as new plants in theu^ youth ; their daugh- 
ters decked out, adorned round about after the 
similitude of a temple : their storehouses full, 
flowing out of this into that. Their sheep 
fruitful in young, abounding in their goings 
forth : their oxen fat. But liappy is that peo- 
ple whose God is the Lord." (Ps. cxliii. 12, 
13, 14, 15.) Such are the people who believe 
true bhss and real happiness How. 

God is good. He hath loved us with an 
everlasting love. (Jer. xxxi. 3.) He willeth 
not the death of the sinner. (Ezech. xxxiii. 
11.) He did not create me to be damned. 

Yes ; God is truly good and merciful ; why 
then are you evil because He is good ? He 
willeth not the death of a sinner; but why, 
then, do you refuse to be converted, and live. 
God is good, but He is also just. One attri- 
bute of the Divine Nature does not exclude nor 
contradict the other, for His attributes are one 
and the same thing with His divine essence. 
While His infinite goodness invites you to re- 
pentance, and offers you the precious gift of 
faith, without which it is impossible to be 
saved, His infinite justice, on the other hand, 
4 



38 



INDIFFEKENCE IN RELIGION. 



threatens obstinacy in sin, and wilM unbelief, 
with eternal destruction. He that will say on 
the last day to the just : " Come, ye blessed of 
My Father, possess the kingdom prepared 
for you from the foundation of the world," 
(Matt. XXV. 34) : will also say to the wicked, 
Depart from Me, ye cursed, into everlasting 
fire, which was prepared for the devil and his 
angels." (Ibid. 41.) You misconstrue the good- 
ness of God. God is good, in creating you for 
an end which transcends all utterance and con- 
ception ; for He Himself is to " be your reward 
exceeding great." (Gen. xv. 2.) He is good, 
in giving you the means to reach that end, in 
offering to all the gift of faith, in facilitating 
the observance of His commandments by His 
holy grace ; in opening to all the channels 
of these graces through the sacraments. He 
is good, in furnishing all with the means of re- 
pentance and expiation for their sins, and of 
increase of holiness and perfection, when they 
have been justified, in giving them the means 
of bringing their temptations to a happy issue. 
In all these things God's goodness is most 
beautifully and touchingly visible. But you 
would have God's goodness, — conniving at 
impiety; sanctioning infidelity; encouraging 
scepticism; promoting indifferentism in re- 



INDIFFERENCE IN RELIGION. 30 



ligion! Tliese things are inconsistent with 
God's nature, and He cannot approve or sanc- 
tion them. 

Doubtless God did not create you. in order 
to damn yon; he left that fearful power to 
yourself. Like a good father. He gave you the 
means to be saved, and told you, at the same 
time^ that the abuse of them would lead to 
your own destruction. "When your father sets 
yon up in life with all the pecuniary means 
that are necessary to success, — when he tells 
you, moreover, in what undertaking you are 
sure to succeed, if you employ the proper 
means, and in what imdertaking, if you abuse 
your natural gifts, you are sure to fail, — he has 
done his duty, and you alone are to blame if 
you miscarry in your choice. We are to judge 
ourselves, in order not to be judged by the 
Lord. Hence we read that Judas, who be- 
trayed Christ, saw, before he terminated his 
wretched existence by suicide, that he was con- 
demned. (Matt, xxvii.) His own reason and 
conscience convicted him of damnable guilt in 
the sight of his Maker. If the governor of a 
State offers life to a convict who is condemned 
to die, where rests the blame, if the latter 
insists on going to the gallows? God of- 
fers you life, if you will but comply with a 



40 



INDEBTEKENCE IN EELIGION. 



few easy conditions whicli he attaclies to the 
boon. 

" But these conditions are too hard." 

Have yon ever endeavored to fulfill them ? 
You cannot reasonably make this objection until 
you have tried the experiment. Do you deem it 
a legitimate excuse in the student to answer his 
master, " Oh, I cannot learn that lesson," as 
long as he has not made the attempt to do so ? 
Can you excuse your servant for refusing to lift 
a certain weight, on his mere word, " I can- 
not," if he never once put his hand to it ? You 
do not reason thus concerning the daily duties 
of life. Study, reflect, meditate, ask and pray, 
and you will find that the yoke which you 
dread is sweet, and the burden light. You 
will find that you can do all things in Him that 
strengtheneth you. 

" I shall see to these matters hereafter." 

When ? When you are old and decrepit — 
. when life's lease is out, and you are about to 
pay the forfeit of neglect of payment ? Why 
not now ? Time is short, eternity is long. Do 
you reason with regard to the things of time, as 
you do with regard to those of eternity ? Do 
you say of your business matters, " I shall at- 
tend to them hereafter ?" Do you defer your 
dinner till the next day, while the hungry ap- 



mDIFFEEEKCE EST KELIGION. 41 



petite clamors for the food tliat is placed before 
you on tlie table ? Do you say, " I shall make my 
bargain to-morrow/' when to-day it is offered in 
the market ? " O, ye sons of men, how long 
will ye be dull of heart?" (Ps. iv. 3.) "Watch 
ye, because you know not at what hour your 
Lord will come." (Matt. xxiy. 42.) Is not time 
given you to prepare for eternity ? Tou delay 
not to purchase stocks, to accumulate capital, 
to add house to house, and acre to acre ; why do 
you defer purchasing the precious pearl of the 
kingdom of Heaven ? Tou have time to waste 
in attending clubs and meetings, in frequenting 
theatres and ball-rooms, in gaming and gamb- 
ling, in eating and drinking ; why can you not 
spend a moment in listening to the Word of 
God? in sating your hungry soul with the 
bread that came from Heaven ? in drinking of 
the waters that spring up into life eternal? 
You have time to beautify your premises, to 
cultivate the fading flowers, to adorn your par- 
lors and your sitting-rooms ; can you not find 
a spare hour to adorn your heart with the 
beauty of vu^tue ? 

" There is good and evil in all religions ; why 
should I be bound to connect myself with 
any?" 

If you mean to say that the principles of all 
4* 



42 



INDIFFERENCE IN RELIGION. 



religions are partly true and partly false, you 
are mistaken ; for tlien there would be no religion 
at all. Religion comes from God, not from 
man, and nothing false or evil can come from 
God, who is the sovereign truth and good. If 
you mean to assert that even false religions 
have some principles which are good, you are 
right in the assertion, but wrong in the in- 
ference which you draw from it. A religion 
made up of sheer errors without any basis of 
truth, could scarcely be conceived, much less 
exist in the world. But it does not follow that 
a part of the truth is as good to you as the 
whole, any more than that a quarter of a dollar 
is as of much value to you as the whole, a 
maimed limb as good as a sound, a sick body 
as serviceable as a healthy one, or a little talent 
as valuable as prominent intellectual gifts or 
genius. We need the truth in its integrity, 
not in fragments only ; we need the full blaze, 
not a mere glimpse or gleam. "When God 
reveals. He wishes to be believed unreservedly. 
One word of His is as good as another, one 
command as binding as another. Christ is not 
divided ; you cannot halt between Him and 
Belial, nor choose between light and darlmess. 
In this instance, " Whosoever but offendeth in 
one point is become guilty of all." (James ii. 



mDIFFEKENCE IN EELIGION. 



43 



10.) If you wisli to say that in all religions 
there are bad as well as good men, yon must 
make a distinction. That there are good 
men in false religions in the sense that the 
false religion produces good men, is not true, 
any more than that a fig-tree bears grapes, 
or the vine figs, or fresh water yields salt. 
(James, iii. 12.) Men are better than their /i 
principles only when they abandon bad for 
good principles in their practice. That there ^ 
are bad men in the true religion cannot be ^ 
denied ; but they are bad, despite, not in virtue 
of their religion. It is not the religion that 
should be blamed, but the men, who call them- 
selves by her name, and cloak themselves with 
her garb. There are bad children in good 
families, and bad citizens under very good 
constitutions. Should the good children cease 
to be members of the family, disown the father 
that begot them and the mother that brought ; & 
them forth, merely because they have brothers ' 
and sisters who neglect their filial duty? 
Should the honest citizen flee liis state or ^ 
country, because he lives in the midst of knaves 
and rogues ? The religion of the Saviour did 
not lose any of its truth or beauty, because a 
weak Apostle denied his Master, and a wicked 
traitor defiled his soul by the crimes of hypo- 



44: INDIFFEEENCE IN EELIGION. 



crisy, sacrilege, and suicide. The fays of tlie 
sun do not lose their light, because they fall 
upon substances impervious to their splendor. 
The art of healing cannot be set aside as use- 
less, because its remedies do not cure every 
patient to whom they are applied. The true 
religion has to deal with men who have theu' 
freedom of choice and action. They can reject 
or abuse the blessings which it offers them. 
The offer is not the less good, because the re- 
cipient of the gift proves ungrateful. Truth 
and virtue are not convertible terms, they are 
not even correlative. The best lawyer at the 
bar may be the greatest rogue in his office, and 
the most learned and experienced judge, be a 
greater criminal than the culprit whom his 
sentence dooms to death. So the strongest 
believer may fall into sin. 

Men can contradict the convictions of their 
mindj by the wickedness of their heart, and 
deny, in practice, what they know to be true in 
theory. 

" My parents do not allow me to follow the 
convictions of my mind. If I became a mem- 
ber of the Church, they would disown me, dis- 
inherit me. My friends would forsake me, my 
companions would laugh at me." 

Suppose all these consequences were to fol 



INDIFFERENCE IN RELIGION. 



45 



low ; should yon on that account expose your 
unmortal sonl to eternal min ? Have yon not 
read in the Scriptures: 

" Fear ye not them that kill the body and 
are not able to kill the sonl; but rather fear 
Him, that can destroy both body and sonl 
into hell. Are not two sparrows sold for a 
farthing ? And not one of them shall fall on 
the ground withont yonr Father. But the very 
hairs of your head are numbered. Fear not, 
therefore : better are yon than many sparrows. 

" Every one that shall confess Me before men, 
I will also confess him before My Father who 
is in Heaven. 

" Bnt he that shall deny Me before men, I 
will also deny him before My Father who is in 
Heaven. 

" Do not think that I came to send peace 
upon earth ; I came not to send peace, but the 
sword. 

" For I came to set a man at variance with 
his father; and the danghter against her 
mother; and the danghter-in-law against her 
mother-in-law. 

" And a man's enemies shall be they of his 
own honsehold. 

" He that loveth father or mother more than 
Me, is not worthy of Me ; and he that loveth 



46 



INDIFFERENCE IN RELIGION. 



son or daughter more than Me, is not worthy 
of Me. 

" And he that taketh not np his cross and 
foUoweth Me, is not worthy of Me. He that 
findeth his life, shall lose it ; and he that shall 
lose his life for Me, shall find it." (Matt. x. 
28-39.) 

Again, have yon not read : " If the world 
hate yon, know ye that it hath hated Me before 
yon. If yon had been of the world, the world 
wonld love its own ; bnt becanse yon are not 
of the world, bnt I have chosen yon ont of the 
world, therefore the world hateth yon. Ee- 
member My word that I said to yon. The 
servant is not greater than the master. If they 
have persecuted Me, they will also persecute 
yon." (John, xv. 18-20.) The difficulties which 
yon are to encounter, the sufferings and per- 
secutions, the sneers and scoffs which you will 
have to endure, are the best proof, that the 
religion which you would otherwise embrace 
is the religion of Christ, therefore the true, the 
only saving religion of the Gospels. 

Did the Apostles shrink from the prison and 
the scourge ? Did they on that account deny 
their faith, or even cease to preach in the 
name of Jesus ? Let your answer to parents, 
friends, and relatives, be that of Peter and John 



INDIFFEEElSrCE IN KELIGION. 47 



to the princes, and ancients, and scribes, in 
Jerusalem : " If it be just in the sight of God 
to hear you rather than God, judge ye ; for 
we cannot but speak the things which we have 
seen and heard." (Acts. iv. 19, 20.) Were your 
fears the fears of the martyrs, who rather than 
betray, by a single sign, their indifference to 
the religion which they had embraced, pro- 
claimed its necessity unto salvation, from the 
pyre, the boiling cauldron, the wheel, and the 
gibbet? Were these the sentiments of the 
heroic confessors who were torn from home 
and friends, had their property confiscated, and 
were themselves cast into filthy dungeons, or 
banished into arid wastes and deserts ? Shame 
upon your cowardice ! If you are convinced of 
the truth, why do you blush to confess it before 
men, before God, and His angels ? Do you hope 
to be saved by your persecuting parents, your 
sneering relations, or your scoffing friends ? 
Will they give their souls in exchange for your 
own, when it shall have been damned because 
you refused to believe ? 

It is true, that you owe respect, honor, obe- 
dience, and love, to the secondary authors of 
your being ; but it is also true that, you must 
love God above all other things, with your 
whole heart, your whole mind, your whole 



48 mDIPFEEENCE IN EELIGIOK. 

soul, for this is the first and the greatest of all 
commandments. God has the first right to 
your honor, obedience, and love. 

Moreover, do not your parents, relatives, and 
fidends, tell you daily, that every man is free to 
f worship God according to the dictates of his 
I own conscience ? Why then are you afraid to 
assert your rights, merely becau'se, in contra- 
diction with their own principles, you would 
be exposed to the shafts of their ridicule^ and 
the cruelty of their persecutions ? Remember 
that you are accountable to God for your own 
deeds, that every one shall bear his own bur- 
den, and that God will render to every one ac- 
cording to his works. 

Look well into this matter. Tour all de- 
pends upon the choice you make in religion. 
You need religion ; without it you cannot serve 
your Maker, nor love Him as He deserves. 
Vfithout it you cannot perfect your nature, 
nor attain the end for which you were created. 
Your soul is at stake. Heaven and hell are in 
the balance. There can be but one religion ; 
for truth is one : then seek that one religion, 
and you shall find it. Above all, ask for the 
gift of faith, and it shall be given you. " For 
this cause bend your knees to the Father of 
our Lord Jesus Christ, that He would grant 



INDIFFERENCE IN RELIGION. 49 

you, according to the riches of His glory, 
to be strengthened by His Spirit, with 
might unto the inward man, that Christ may 
dwell by faith in your ^learts." (Eph. iii. 14, 
16, 17.) 



IL 



THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF 
FAITH. 

"Go ye into the whole world and preach the Gospel 
to every creature. He that believeth, and is baptized, 
shall be saved ; but he that believeth not, shall be con- 
demned." Mabk, xvi. 15, 16. 

"We have seen that Faith is necessary to 
salvation : that without it, it is impossible to 
please God. Therefore, they who die withont 
faith shall be condemned. (Mark, xvi. 16.) 

But it is clear, that not every kind of faith 
is sufficient unto salvation. We must have 
divine faith ; the faith which Christ, the God- 
man, came to preach. That faith, like Christ 
Himself, is necessarily one. Christ cannot 
contradict Himself. He must needs teach one 
and the same truth, concerning one and the 
same article of faith. He cannot teach two 
opposite sets of doctrines, on one and the 
same subject. There is, therefore — there can 
be — ^but one true faith. If that one true faith 
is to save us, then we must have a means to get 



THE BIBLE NOT THE KULE OF FAITH. 51 

at it — an easy, a certain, a secure means. It 
must be an easy means — for all must believe — 
the ignorant, as well as tbe learned ; tbe unin- 
structed barbarian, as well as the enligbtened 
academician, or universitarian. It must be cer- 
tain ; for, faitb is an act of tbe mind wbicli 
excludes all doubt. He who doubts, does not 
believe; and lie who believes, does not doubt. 
It must be secure ; tbe very fear of the possi- 
bility of being deceived must be removed : for, 
if there is any ground to fear that the means 
which w^e employ for getting faith may lead us 
astray, then our faith may be an illusion, and 
no faith at all.. 

Now, what is this easy, certain and secure 
means of having that faith without which it is 
impossible to be saved ? Our separated breth- 
ren tell us, it is the written word — the Bible, 
the whole Bible, and nothing but the Bible, 
interpreted by every one's private judgment. 

This, we Eoman Catholics deny, and we 
adduce the reasons of our denial. • 

In the first place, we say that if the Bible, 
or written word alone, was designed by Christ 
to be every man's rule of faith, then every man 
must be able to find out whether he has the 
Bible, the whole Bible, and nothing but the 
Bible. And if he is consistent, he must find 



52 THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 

it out by bimself. He must settle this matter 
by his own private judgment. Evidently, tlie 
first act of faith is to be exercise^ regarding 
th^ Bible itself. Before yon can believe any 
specific article of faith, on the authority of the 
Bible as the word of God, you must first be 
infallibly certain that the book, in which you 
find that specific article, is the word of God, 
and not the word of man. Before we accept 
any article of the Constitution of the United 
States, we must first be certain, that the book 
in which this or that article is found, is really 
and verily the genuine Constitution. Now, 
how shall the believer settle that question? 
Not by the Bible itself; for that would be 
begging the question . Suppose the Bible 
should assert its own authenticity, the question 
would still return : " But how do I know that 
the assertion of its own authenticity is itself 
authentic; how do I know that this asser- 
tion is God's own ? " No book or written do- 
cument proves its own authenticity. No last 
will, no paper, containing, for instancb, a con- 
tract entered upon by buyer and seller, proves 
its own genuineness. Witnesses, living wit- 
nesses, credible witnesses, are the only sufficient 
evidence of their genuineness. So it is with 
tlie written word of God. Its authenticity, its 



THE BIBLE NOT THE BULE OF FAHH. 53 

genuineness, its inspiration, must be proved by 
living and credible witnesses. But where and 
wbo are those witnesses? Those who were 
present when the Bible was written, those who 
knew the penmen that wrote it, and those who 
handed it down as it was written, during the 
lapse of ages. !Now, the Gospel bears the vene- 
rable age of nineteen centuries! Who were 
the witnesses, present at the time it was first 
written ? The first Christians, of course ; those 
who lived in the days of the Evangelists and 
sacred penmen themselves. But these Chris- 
tians were Catholics. Protestantism was not 
born till 1517 ; sixteen centuries after the Bible 
had been written. Our separated brethren, 
then, must refer to Catholics, and Catholic 
tradition, or history, in order to settle the first 
question of their faith. But to do this would 
be to contradict themselves. For they look 
upon the Roman Catholic Church as the parent 
of all errors, so that whoever believes her testi- 
mony, believes a lie. They, moreover, assert 
that she has corrupted the word of God, that, 
contrary to the divine command, she has added 
to and taken away from the written word. 
How then will they settle the very first article 
of their faith, which should run as follows : " I 
firmly believe, as firmly as I believe my own 
5* 



54: THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE 05 FAITH. 

existence, as firmly as I believe tlie existence 
of God, that the book which I hold in my hand, 
is the whole word of God, neither more nor 
less." Abandoning the ground of invoking 
the external evidence of the Chnrch of Rome, 
in behalf of the inspiration and genuineness of 
the Bible, they appeal to the contents of the 
book, as irrefragable proof of its inspiration : 
" The sublime doctrines of faith and morality 
contained in the old and new Testaments, are 
themselves their own proof, are unmistakable 
evidence of their divine origin." This evidence, 
we suppose, is clear to all. Every one that 
reads can see, as well as you, whether what he 
reads is inspired or not, divine or human. If 
so, how comes it that so many even holy men, 
have difiered among themselves, as to what 
books, chapters, and verses were or were not 
divinely inspired? For you know that the 
question of the canonicity of all the scriptures 
was not finally settled till the third council of 
Carthage, held in the fourth century. Yea, 
the very reformers who introduced the maxim, 
that the Bible, and the Bible alone, is every 
man's ri^le of faith, were not agreed upon this 
question. Luther cast serious doubts upon the 
inspiration of some books, and altogether re- 
jected others, which you hold to be inspired. 



THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 55 

Thus he writes : 

" The books of Kings are more worthy of 
credit than the books of Chronicles." If they 
are both inspired, how can the one be more 
worthy of credit than the other ? 

Of the book of Job, he says : " Job spoke 
not as it stands written in his book ; but had 
only such cogitations. It is merely the argu- 
ment of a fable. It is probable that Solomon 
made and wrote this book." How can you 
make an act of divine faith on the contents of 
a book which is merely the argument of a 
fable ? 

" The book entitled Ecclesiastes, ought," he 
continues, " to have been more ftdl. There is 
too much incoherent matter in it. It has 
neither boots nor spurs ; but rides only in 
socks, as I myself did, when an inmate of the 
cloister. Solomon has not, therefore, written 
this book, which was made in the days of the 
Machabees, by Sirach. It is like a Talmud, 
compiled from many books, perhaps in Egypt, 
at the desire of King Evergetes. So have, also, 
the Proverbs of Solomon, been collected by 
others." 

" The book of Esther," he exclaims, " I toss 
into the Elbe ! I am such an enemy to the 
book of Esther, that I wish it did not exist 



56 THE BIBLE NOT THE KULE OF FAITH. 

for it judaizes too mucli, and has in it a great 
deal of heatlienisli naughtiness." 

" Isaiah the prophet has borrowed his knowl- 
edge and his art from the Psalter." 

" The history of Jonah is so monstrons, that 
it is absolutely incredible." 

" That the Epistle to the Hebrews is not by 
St. Paul, nor by any other apostle at all, is 
shown by chapter ii., verse 3d. It is by an ex- 
cellent, a learned man, a disciple of the Apos- 
tles. It should be no stumbling-block, if there 
be found in it, a mixture of wood, straw, and 
hay." But, how am I to make an act of divine 
faith on an epistle which was not written by 
any Apostle, but only one of their disciples ? 
and how am I to discern the wood, the straw, 
and hay, from the pure gold and silver ? 

He called the Epistle of St. James " an epis- 
tle of straw," unworthy of an Apostle, and 
adds : " in the Revelation of St. John, too 
much is wanting to have me deem it Apostol- 
ical ; I can discover no trace in it that it is es- 
tablished by the Spirit." (Edinburgh Eeview, 
No. 121.) 

The same review from which we have 
drawn the above quotations, subjoins the 
following : " The most learned and intelligent 
of Protestant divines here, almost all doubted, 



THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF FAITH. 57 

or denied the canonicity of the book of Eeve- 
lation. Calvin and Beza pronounced the book 
nnintelligible, and prohibited the pastors of 
Geneva from all attempts at interpretation, for 
which they were applauded by Joseph Scaliger, 
and Isaac Casaubon. Joseph Scaliger, who 
also rejected the Epistle of St. James, did not 
believe the Apocalypse to be the writing of St. 
John, and allowed only two chapters to be 
comprehensible, while Dr. South scrupled not 
to pronounce it, a book that either found a man 
mad, or left him so.'^ 

If these learned men were puzzled, when 
they had to decide the question, what portions 
of the Bible are, and what others are not the 
inspired word of God, how much more difficult 
must such decision be for the people — for the 
masses? How impossible to the ignorant? 
And yet these must have faith — these must be- 
lieve the whole "Word of God, and nothing 
but the Word of God — as well as the ablest 
divines, the most learned theologians. 

Nor will it do to say as Luther, and Calvin^ 
and Wesley, seem to have said : that besides 
the external word, there is an internal word, 
which helps us to understand what is divinely 
inspired. For the question always returns : 
How are you sure that there is such an interna] 



58 THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF FAITH. 

word ? From the Scriptures ? But that would 
be to reason in a vicious circle. Tou assert 
tbe internal word, on the evidence of the ex- 
ternal, or written word ; and the external word 
on the evidence of the internal word. You 
prove by the internal word, that the text of the 
external, or written word, must be regarded as 
asserting the existence of the internal word. 
How do you know that the internal word is 
not mistaken in the interpretation of the ex- 
ternal word? Moreover, does the external 
word testify with certainty to the fact, that 
only such, and no other books of the Scrip- 
tures, are inspired? Suppose, for instance, 
that there were other books besides those which 
you have in your edition of the Bible, which 
others, led by the same internal word of the 
Spirit, deem divinely inspired, would not your 
spirit contradict their spirit, and would both 
spirits be the sufficient reason for you to re- 
ject, and for them to retain those books as in- 
spired ? If so, they cannot both be the Spirit 
of God, for He is the Spirit of truth, and does 
not contradict Himself The same argument 
will apply to every chapter, verse, and word 
of the Scriptures. What evidence have you, 
from the internal word, that every chapter, 
verse, and word which you have in your 



THE BIBLE NOT THE KULE OF FAITH. 59 

edition, is inspired just as they read, and are 
printed? How, then, comes it, that there 
are so many readings of these same chapters, 
verses, and words ? Have yon never heard of 
the numerous varieties of readings in the dif- 
ferent editions of the Bible, both in Hebrew, 
Greek Latin, English, and indeed, in all the 
languages into which the Bible is translated? 
If all have the internal word to settle so im- 
portant a matter, how comes it that no unifor- 
mity has as yet been established in the reading 
of all these editions ? 

And have you any assurance that this inter- 
nal word belongs to you, any more than to us ? 
If the internal spirit be the only medium; in- 
fallibly to decide what is inspired and what is 
not inspired, in the Scripture, the fathers, doc- 
tors, and councils of the Church must have had 
the same guide in their decisions as yon have — 
yet, their spirit decided differently from your 
own. One of these spirits, then, must neces- 
sarily be a spirit of error. It is for you to 
prove that yours is not that spirit. 

Suppose, for argument's sake, that you dis- 
covered, by the aid of the internal word, the 
inspiration of the books you hold in your hand, 
what will you do with those books which are 
set down as containing certain facts — ^perhaps 



60 THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF FAITH. 

doctrines — not to be fonnd in yonr edition? 
Thus, for instance, how do yon know by yonr 
internal spirit, that the book of the Wars ol 
the Lord, mentioned in Numbers (xxi. 14), the 
book of the Just (Jos. x. 13), the book ot 
Nathan the prophet (1 Chron. xxix. 29), the 
book of Ahiah the Silonite, and of Addo the 
Seer against Jeroboam, and the books of 
Semeiah the prophet (2 Chron. ix. 29 ; xii. 15), 
were not inspired, and therefore, a part of the 
revealed "Word of God, necessary to be believed? 

In the beginning of the Chnrch there were 
extant many writings, which, by some, were 
looked upon as inspired, and by others rejected 
as uninspired Scriptures: what says your inter- 
nal spirit, or word, concerning them? How 
can your spirit pronounce without reading 
them — and some of them, such as those we 
have quoted from the Old Testament, can no 
longer be read, because they no longer exist ? 
But, what says your spirit concerning those 
that were written since the beginning of Christ- 
ianity ? Do you place them in the hands of 
the people, just as you do the authorized version 
of King James? If not, why not? Should 
not every one of you be able to decide on their 
inspiration? And how can that decision be 
given without reading them ? 



\ 



THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF FAITH. 61 



Why do you reject^ for instance, tlie Gospdla 
of Mattliias, of Peter the Apostle, of James, 
of Barnabas, of St. Thomas, of St. Bartholo- 
mew, of St. Andrew ; the Acts of Peter, of 
Andrew, of Thomas, of Philip, of Thecla and 
Paul the Apostle ; the books of the Nativity 
of Our Lord, and the Infancy of the Saviour ? 

Why reject the book called the Pastor or 
Shepherd, which Origen quotes as divinely in- 
spired, which Euffinus numbers among the 
books of the New Testament, and the Pro- 
testant Whiston calls " an inspired book which 
comes directly from our Saviour as does the 
Apocalypse? " 

How will every man who is to be saved by 
reading the Bible alone, decide for himself, 
whether the book called the Foundation, an- 
other called the Treasure ; the book of the 
children of Ada ; the Centemetrum of Christ ; 
the book of Cephas ; the Eevelations of St. 
Paul ; the Eevelations of St. Thomas the 
Apostle, of St. Stephen; the book of the 
Transitus of Mary ; the Penitential Acts of 
Addo ; the Testament of Job ; the Penitence 
of Jannes and Mambres; the Praise of the 
Apostles ; the Canons of the Apostles (once 
held, by some local Churches, on the same level 
as th-e four Gospels and the Acts of the 
6 



62 THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 



i^ostles), are not, now, to be considered the 
inspired word of God ? If tlie autbority of the 
Chnrch of Eome is sufficient evidence to yon 
that they are not inspired, why is her anthority 
not equally sufficient, when she tells yon that 
others, which yon now reject, snch as the 
Machabees, are really insjDired ? Her anthority 
is as reliable in the one as in the other instance. 

No one, therefore, can be infallibly certain, 
without an infallible authority outside of the 
Bible, that he has the whole Bible, and noth- 
ing but the Bible ; consequently, no one can 
say that he believes all the truths of faith. 

If you appeal to the Bible itself as the wit- 
ness of its sufficiency, it will tell you that it 
does not contain all that might and should be 
written. St. J ohn, who was the last to write 
his Gospel, concluded his closing chapter by 
saying : "And there are also many other things^ 
which Jesus did, which, if they were written, 
every one, the world itself, I think, would not 
be able to contain the books that should be 
written." (Jo. xxi. 25.) "Where is St. Paul's 
epistle to the Laodiceans, which he commands 
the Colossians to read in their Church? 
(Coloss. iv. 16.) St. Paul tells the Corinthians 
" I wrote to you in the letter," etc. (i. Cor. v. 9.) 
Where is that epistle of St. Paul to the Corin 



THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 63 



thians ? By what prophet was it written : 
" He shall be called a Nazarite." (Matt. ii. 23.) 
All these scriptures are lost. Hence, you must 
conclude that you have not, and cannot have, 
the whole word of God. And yet, according 
to you, nothing but the Bible, the whole Bible, 
is your rule of faith. 

The difficulty does not end here. To make 
an act of divine faith on the Bible, it is further 
necessary to make, first, an act of divine faith 
on the correctness of the copy which you are 
reading. Now, what you read is generally a 
translation. Many of our separated brethren 
never for a moment reflect that the greater 
part of the Bible was originally written in 
Hebrew, some of it in Syro-Chaldaic, or Chal- 
dean, and the rest in Greek. How will you 
determine the correctness of the translation 
which you hold in your hands ? Not by com- 
paring the copy with the originals; for that 
would suppose, first, that the originals did still 
exist, which is not the fact ; and secondly, that 
the majority of the readers, or rather all, know 
the languages in which the originals were 
written. This cannot be supposed; for then 
translations would be useless. But, I am told, 
" Look at the title page ; " it reads : " The Holy 
Bible, translated from the original Hebrew and 



64 THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 

Greek ; " and socaetimes we find the slight ad- 
dition : Carefully compared and revised." 
Who will vouch for the truth of the fact there 
asserted ? How does an ordinary mechanic or a 
laboring man (and they compose the majority 
of believers) know that the translator, or trans- 
lators, had sufficient knowledge of these lan- 
guages, to guarantee the correctness of the 
translation ? Were they specially assisted by 
Heaven? Had they a sufficient knowledge, 
not only of the languages, but also of the 
doctrines of the work which they translated ? 
Who does not know how difficult it is for any 
number of scholars, however learned, perfectly 
to agree on the meaning of certain idioms and 
allusions, national, personal or local, the real 
nature of which is lost to the world, because 
not consigned to history, or if consigned there, 
not sufficiently explained? Who does not 
know how many volumes of scriptural herme- 
neutics or biblical criticism have been written 
to clear up certain expressions in the Bible, 
which are obscure on account of the distance 
of time and place, and the antiquity of the 
people, among whom or of whom they were 
written ? How can unlearned men settle such 
difficulties ? They cannot do it from personal 
knowledge. Are they safe in relying upon 



THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF FAITH. 65 



the knowledge of fallible translators? Sup- 
pose the translators were mistaken in ren- 
dering the exact meaning of bnt one text which 
contains an article of faith, then the reader is 
equally mistaken in reading the inaccurate 
version. Then he is mistaken in his belief. 
But a mistaken faith is no faith, at all. There- 
fore, such a reader could not have a salutary faith. 

How stands the question of these translations 
according to the testimony of our separated 
brethren themselves? Xuther was the first 
among the Eeformers to translate the Bible 
into his native tongue. How did he succeed ? 
Listen to Zwingle. "Writing of Luther's ver- 
sion, he says: "Thou corruptest, O Luther, 
the word of God. Thou art known to be an 
open and notorious perverter of the Holy 
Scriptures. How much are we ashamed of 
thee now, whom we had once so much re- 
spected !" 

Luther returns the compliment to Zwingle. 
He calls the translators of the Zwinglean Bible 
" a set of fools, antichrists, and impostors'." 

Of Castalio's translation, Beza, the Calvinist, 
says, that " it is sacrilegious, wicked, and down 
right pagan." 

Molineux wrote of Calvin's translation, " Cal- 
vin makes the text of the Gospel leap up and 
6* 



66 THE BIBLE NOT THE ETJLE OF FAITH. 

down. He does violence to the letter, and 
makes additions to the texts." 

The same anthor says of Beza's translation : 
"J3eza actually changes the text;" and Cas- 
talio adds, that "it would require a large 
volume to mark down the multitude of errors, 
which swarm in Beza's translation." 

Let us listen to the Anglican clergy of Lin- 
coln, writing to King J ames, on the authorized 
version still in use: "Our translation takes 
away from the text, and adds to the text. It 
obscures and changes the meaning of the Holy 
Ghost." 

This caused Mr. Burgess, a learned member 
of the Establishment, to write: "How shall 
I approve, under my hand, a translation which 
has so many omissions, and so many additions ; 
which sometimes obscures, sometimes perverts 
the sense; being sometimes senseless, some- 
times contrary ?" 

How can any man rely upon such transla- 
tions, as the word of God ? Indeed, the ques- 
tion of a new translation, has been agitated 
among several of the sects, and preparations 
were in progress, some years since, to effect so 
desirable and necessary an object as soon as 
possible. We derive from these facts : First, the 
avowal that hitherto our separated brethren 



THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF FAITH. 67 



lidve not been able to make an act of Divine 
faith on tbeir translated Bibles. Secondly 
that it will remain impossible for posterity to 
do so nntil they contrive another means by 
which they may infallibly secure the correct- 
ness of a new translation. However numer- 
ous and learned the new translators may be, 
they can never, without a higher authority than 
that which flows from literary knowledge, 
prove to the satisfaction of their readers, that 
they could not be, and therefore were not mis- 
taken in their new version of the Scriptures. 
To do this requires an authority equal to the 
Scriptures themselves; an authority which is 
the divinely appointed guardian and interpre- 
ter of the whole Word of God. But such an 
authority they reject, and, if true to their prin- 
ciples, will continue to reject as long as they 
exist. 

Testing this question still further by the 
rules of common sense, we alBrm that, in order 
to make the reading of the Bible the only rule 
of faith, Christ must have foreseen that all 
should be able to get a copy of the Bible. But 
this He could not possibly foresee, since it was 
never to be a fact. Had Luther lived one cen- 
tury and a half earlier than he did, he would 
never have established his principle. For he 



68 THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 



would have been met on all sides by tbe ques- 
tion : How shall we get a copy of the Bible ? 
Before the invention of the art of printings 
all books had to be procured by the tedious 
and costly process of the stylus or pen. It is 
easy to conceive that the majority of mankind 
were necessarily deprived of the pleasure of 
reading many a book, which the printing-press 
has since multiplied almost indefinitely. To 
copy with the pen thirteen hundred chapters, 
containing over thirty thousand verses, was no 
easy task for any scribe or amanuensis. How 
many of these scribes it would require to place 
in the hands of one in a thousand men or 
women, a single copy of the Word of God, 
would be an interesting problem to solve. 
But how many must needs have been deprived 
of the book merely because they could not find 
such a scribe, or because they had not the 
means to pay him for his labor. We are seri- 
ous when we assert that if our Bible-reading 
brethren could get at a copy only as did Chris- 
tians before the fifteenth century, they would 
blush at the idea of making it the only rule of 
faith for all ; yea, we dare assert that if they 
had to pay a scribe for copying the Scriptures, 
they would look twice at their purse before 
striking a bargain, and many would say, if my 



THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 69 

faith is to cost me so dear, I will liave none ot 
it. Yet during fifteen centnries of the Chris- 
tian era, scarcely one in a thousand could ob- 
tain a copy of the Bible ; and if it be true that 
without it they could not be saved, the ma- 
jority of the Christian world, before the inven- 
tion of printing, went to hell, and are lost 
without any real fault of their own. The sup- 
position is impious. Christ, therefore, did not 
make the reading of the Bible the only rule oi 
man's faith. 

In the next place, Christ must have foreseen 
that all would be able to read their copy of the 
Bible. But He could no more see this, than 
the foregoing fact, for it was never to be. Ed- 
ucation depends on circumstances. These are 
not equally favorable in all ages, and among 
all people. Before the art of printing, all edu- 
cation was, of necessity, mainly oral. The 
scholar had to hang on the lips of his masters 
for whatever knowledge he expected to acquire 
in the college, academy, or parish school. His 
only hope, besides this, was the rare privilege, 
of looking at a manuscript in some collegiate 
or monastic library. You can easily conceive 
that the difficulty of acquiring' even the first 
rudiments of learning, such as spelling and 
reading, must have deterred a great m.any from 



70 THE BIBLE NOT THE KULE OF FAITH. 

acquiring those accomplisliments. If even, at 
tliis period of the world, with all the improve- 
ments and facilities which printed books afford, 
there are many who cannot read at all, how 
much more general mnst that ignorance have 
been during the centuries which preceded the 
great invention of Fanst and Guttenberg. We 
have met hundreds, not of aliens only, but of 
men born on the soil of this Eepublic, who had 
to own that they could neither read nor write 
And when the cause was asked, one would an 
swer, " I lived in the country, where there wa^ 
no school nearer than ten miles, and of course^ 
I could not attend it. My parents were una 
ble to afford a private tutor, and they them- 
selves were uneducated, simple people." "I 
was left an orphan at an early age," would 
another say, " and had to hire out my services 
to make a living." Did Christ intend that 
all these should get their faith by reading ? If 
not, then the principle does not hold — that the 
Bible alone is every man's rule of faith. "We 
shall not speak of the millions and millions of 
barbarians, who never could read, and never 
will be able to read. Their incorrigible ten- 
dency to a nomadic life, their indolent habits, 
their very hatred of the polished and refined 
white-man, are all so many obstacles to civili- 



THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF FAITH. 71 

zation, whose mental rudiments begin with the 
learning of the alphabet and the primer. 

But suppose even that all can read ; have 
they sufficient intelligence to understand the 
Bible ? Genius and talents are rare gifts, 
the privilege of one in a thousand. The ma- 
jority of the race have but very limited intel- 
lect and judgment. To convince yourselves oi 
the fact, you have only to make the experiment 
in a promiscuous multitude at a political, re- 
ligious, or social meeting. Hand round your 
simplest village newspaper. How many will 
read it with any thing like intelligence ? One 
will spell his way through a few short sen- 
tences ; another will run comma into semico* 
Ion; and colon into full stop, without any 
connection of phrase or sense. "Now suppose 
these same men stuttering and stumbling 
through thirteen hundred chapters and thirty 
thousand verses of a book, which contains the 
sublimest doctrines of faith and morality that 
were ever taught on earth. How do you ex- 
pect them to analyze and synthetize, with a 
knowledge and care on which their very sal- 
vation depends, all the different texts and con- 
texts that bear upon one and the same mystery 
of faith, or dogma of morality ? How can you 
expect them to reconcile all apparent contra- 



72 THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF FAITH. 

dictions, all tie seeming discrepancies that 
occur between Gospel and Gospel, Epistle and 
Epistle ? To do this with any thing like suc- 
cess, would require the effort of a gigantic 
genius; and even such a one, according to 
Luther himself, would fail in the task. For, 
according to the Father of the Keformation, it 
would take a man a hundred years to become 
acquainted with only some portions of the 
Scriptures; and Claude, a French Calvinist 
minister, in the days of the great Bossuet, de- 
clared, that "Life is too short, and human 
strength too weak, to fathom the sense of the 
Bible, — that fathomless well of mysteries and 
of truth." 

Add to this, that Christ foresaw that millions 
and millions would not have the time, even if 
they had the will, and the ability, so to read 
the Bible as to make it their only safe guide in 
matters of faith and morals. Man has social 
and domestic duties enjoined him by Heaven 
itself, which he must fulfil, if he wishes to es- 
cape punishment. How will he reconcile two 
evidently contradictory wills of the same Deity 
in his regard ? There is the poor husbandman, 
who has a growing family relying on his labor 
and industry for their scanty support. In the 
sweat of his brow, he works from morning till 



THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF EATm. 73 

night, from week to week, and year to year. 
Will you tell that man, after he comes home 
n the evening, worn out with the day's toil, 
that, instead of entertaining his wife with the 
pleasing details of his labor, and the prospect 
of an abundant crop ; instead of calling his 
children to his knees, and caressing them, he 
must sit down to search the Scriptures ? After 
he has attended meeting of a sabbath, will you 
deprive him of a refreshing walk with his wife 
and children, or a visit to a relative, friend or 
neighbor, whom he cannot possibly see at any 
other time ? Will you tell that servant-girl of 
yours that, if ever she hopes to be saved, she 
must, after having waited upon your family, 
from five in the morning until ten or eleven 
o'clock at night, forego her few hours of sleep 
to enter upon the still more fatiguing labor of 
studying out the "Word of God ? Would she 
not reasonably demur, and complain of such an 
injunction ? And yet, all these are the con- 
sequences which flow logically from the prin- 
ciple, that the written word alone was designed 
by Christ to be every man's rule of faith. 

The fact is, very few among our separated 
brethren seem practically to believe in their 
own principle. Examining closely the conduct 

of the Bible Christians in any sect, how many 
7 



74: THE BIBLE KOT THE EULE OF FAITH. 

will yoa find, who really read the Scripture, 
and read it as it should be read, assiduously, 
carefully, prayerfully, in order to make it a 
rule of faith and action ? 

How will a child eight or even ten years of 
age get the saving faith from the Bible ? It is 
certain, that, ordinarily speaking, a child that 
has reached the age of seven or eight, is capa- 
ble of distinguishing between virtue and vice, 
and the necessity of practising the one, and 
avoiding the other. Now, faith is the first and 
the most essential virtue for that child. With- 
out faith it cannot please God, it cannot be 
saved. But it must come to faith by the exer- 
cise of its own private judgment. It must read 
the Bible, and interpret it for itself. Tell me 
by what process of reasoning will that child 
come to the knowledge of the following facts : 
first, that there is a Bible ; secondly, what that 
Bible is ; of how many books it is composed ; 
whether all those books, and their chapters and 
verses and words, are all and every one from 
God and the pens of inspired writers ; thirdly, 
whether the translation it is reading is genuine, 
correct, faultless. Next, how shall it go about 
interpreting the various doctrines which are 
therein contained ? How shall it solve its 
own objections ; clear up its own doubts ? To 



THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF FAITH. 75 

say that the child can do all this without an 
authority extrinsic to the book which it is 
reading, is simply absurd. But what authority, 
extrinsic to the Bible, is sufficient to save that 
child from error? Is it parental authority? 
What Scriptm^e teaches, that the parents ol 
such a child are its Heaven-appointed teach- 
ers, in matters of faith and religion? Is it 
the minister of the village or town in which 
the child lives ? Can he prove his appoint- 
ment as a teacher, and can he say to the child : 
" He that hears me, hears Jesus Christ, and he 
that despises me, despises Christ ? " Dare he 
obtrude his own opinions on the mind of the 
child ? What guarantee does he give to the 
child, that he is not, that he cannot be, mis- 
taken ? Must he not, if he is consistent with 
his own principles, refuse to teach the child 
anything, since he holds it as a first principle 
that there is no sufficient authority in matters 
of faith, except the Bible as read and inter- 
preted by every individual who has come to 
the years of discretion ? Without an infallible 
guide that child cannot possibly believe, and 
must remain an infidel or a sceptic during a 
great portion of its life. But it may die, and 
if it die without the gift of faith, it shall be 
condemned. 



76 THE BIBLE NOT THE KTJLE OF FAITH. 



What we say of cliildren, may be said of tlie 
illiterate. They cannot possibly believe, if the 
Protestant rule of faith is admitted, and, con- 
sequently, they must perish for ever. 

Our dissenting brethren cannot refer to au- 
thority as a substitute for the Bible ; for, in so 
doing, they contradict their own principle, and 
do not advance one step farther. For, the 
human authority on which they rely, instead 
of the divine authority of the Bible, cannot 
give the illiterate any more than a human 
faith, which is not sufficient unto salvation. 

We now pass to another class of common- 
sense arguments on this all-important question. 
If Christ really intended that a written book 
should be the only authority and rule of faith 
unto all men, is it not natm^al to suppose that 
He Himself would have written it % And 
yet, our Divine Saviour never wrote a single 
line. 

Our Saviour not only did not write Himself, 
but He never ordered His Apostles or disciples 
to write a word of all that He had taught 
them. He ordered them to go and preach the 
Gospel to every creature, to teach all nations 
whatsoever He had commanded them ; but He 
never so much as insinuated a desire that they 
should record a single word of all that He had 



THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 77 



said to them. How do yon explain tMs appa- 
rent contradiction ? 

If the Gospel was to be propagated by read 
ing, rather than by hearing the Word of God 
some of the Apostles were very remiss in theii 
duty. For it does not appear that, besides 
Saints Matthew, John, Peter, Paul, James, and 
Jude, any other Apostle ever wrote a line. 
Yea, those who did write can scarcely be ex- 
onerated from a serious neglect of their Mas- 
ter's will. St. Matthew, who was the first to 
write, waited some six years after the ascension 
of our Lord, before he placed his pen on papy- 
rus, and thus deprived the Jews and Pagans of 
the only rule of faith, by which they were to 
be saved. The other Apostles and Evangelists 
delayed still longer ; and St. John did not 
finish his Apocalypse until about sixty-four 
years had elapsed after the foundation of the 
Christian Church ; nor did they write every- 
thing they had heard or witnessed, as we have 
already seen, from the last chapter of St. John. 
St. Paul does not seem to have written the 
whole Gospel which he had received from God ; 
for, to the Thessalonians he wites : " Therefore, 
brethren, stand fast ; and hold the traditions, 
wliich ye have learned, whether by word or by 

our epistle." (2 Thess. ii. 14.) Again : " We 
7* 



78 THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 



charge yon, bretliren, in the name of onr Lord 
Jesus Christ, to withdraw yourselves from every 
brother walking disorderly, and not according 
to the tradition which they received from ns." 
(Ibid. iii. 6.) What mean his expressions to the 
Corinthians : and keep my ordinances as Ihave 
delivered them to you" (1 Cor. xi. 2) ; and " I 
have received of the Lord that which also 1 
delivered nnto you" (ibid. 23) ; " And the rest 
I will set in order, when I come" ? (Ibid. 34.) 

What mean the following words to Timothy ? 

Hold the form of sound words, which thou 
hast heard of me in faith" (2 Tim. i. 13) ; " And 
the things which thou hast heard from me by 
many witnesses, the same commit to faithful 
men, who shall be fit to teach others also" 
(ibid. ii. 2) ; " But continue thou in the things 
which thou hast learned^ and which are com- 
mitted to thee ; knowing from whom thou hast 
learned ?" (Ibid. iii. 14.) St. Paul, then, not- 
withstanding the many Epistles he had written, 
did not write all that was necessary to be taught 
and observed ; nor does he refer those, whom 
he addressed, to his other epistles, or to the 
Gospels of the other Evangelists and Apostles, 
but to the traditions — the things which he had 
delivered to them — which had been entrusted 
to them, which they had learned from his lips. 



THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 79 

The Christians, during the lifetime of the 
Apostles, did not, therefore, get their faith by 
the Bible alone. Nor did the millions and 
millions who sncceeded them during the cen- 
turies which followed. If the Apostles had 
been taught by their Master, that the ordinary 
means of coming to the faith was to be the 
reading of the Bible, they certainly would have 
impressed this truth so forcibly upon the mind 
of their successors in the ministry, and upon 
the people, that we should have unmistakable 
evidences of this fact in the history of the 
Church and the writings of the Fathers. So 
far from having any evidences that a single 
tribe or nation was Christianized by reading 
the Bible, we find countless proofs that most, 
if not all of them, joined the Church without 
having ever read a letter of the Scriptures. 
To this St. Irenseus and other Fathers bear the 
clearest testimony. If the Scriptures had been 
the only touch-stone to test truth and heresy, 
the Church would never have condemned, as 
heretics, those who denied doctrines not clearly 
contained in the Scriptures. This, however, 
she did from the very beginning of Christian- 
ity. Thus, the baptism of children is, accord- 
ing to the showing of many separated Churches, 
not clearly proved fi'om the Bible to be neces- 



80 THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 

sary unto salvation ; and yet the council of Mi- 
letus condemned as heretics such as deny this 
doctrine. The Quarto-decimani were also 
condemned as heretics^because they would not 
believe that Easter should always be kept on 
the fourteenth day of the moon ; a doctrine 
which it is not easy to prove from the Scrip- 
tures alone. Again, how could the early wri- 
ters of the Church have held it a peculiarity of 
heretics to appeal always to the Scriptures for 
the doctrines which they advanced, or which 
they denied, if it was the very rule which 
Christ Himself had established, as the only test 
of truth and error? '^Heretics," writes St. 
Ephrem, "wishing to give strength to their 
error, endeavored to extract passages from the 
Scriptures, by which to pervert the minds of 
those who may listen to them." (De Yirtute, 
c. viii., 2,) 

"Heresies," Says the great St. Augustine, 
" and other certain pernicious doctrines, have 
not arisen except from the holy Scriptures be- 
ing ill understood." (Tract xviii. n. i., in Joan.) 

If the Scriptures were really intended to be 
the only rule of man's faith, they should evi- 
dently contain all the doctrines that are to be 
believed ; yet how many doctrines are believecj 
by our separated brethren, which cannot be 



THE BIBLE NOT THE EIDLE OF FAITH. 81 

clearly established by the Scriptures alone? 
Thus the Scriptures nowhere assert their ovm 
inspiration, nor the number of the books, nor 
the genuineness of all the texts. They do not 
state whether their contents have a literal or a 
figurative meaning, or when they should be 
understood literally or figuratively. They do 
not enumerate the precise points which are to 
be believed of necessity unto salvation. They 
do not teach the necessity of infant baptism, 
nor specify the change of the Sabbath to the 
Sunday. Where will you find in them, that 
those who were baptized in heresy, must not be 
rebaptized ? or that baptism should be admin- 
istered by immersion instead of by sprinkling ? 
They do not clearly settle the order and subor- 
dination of the Pastors of the Church. Nor is 
it clear from them whether there should be 
bishops, or elders only. Finally, they do not 
establish distinctly the number of the sacra- 
ments, and their nature. 

So on the other hand, there are many things 
clearly prescribed in the Scriptures, which our 
separated brethren observe no more than we. 
Who among them, except the Dunkers, wash 
the feet of the disciples before they take the 
Lord's Supper ? Who of them abstains fi^om 
any kind of meat, whether strangled or not ; 



82 THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF FAITH. 



and from blood-pudding, which were forbidden 
in the name of the Holy Ghost, by the Apos- 
tles to the first Christians ? Who observes the 
moral precepts : " Go, then, and eat thy bread 
with joy, and drink thy wine with gladness 
because thy works please God. At all times 
let thy garments he white^ and let not oil de- 
part from thy head. Live joyftdly with the 
wife whom thou lovest." (Eccl. ix. 7-9.) Who 
but the Quaker observes the following ? " I say 
to you, not to swear at all." (Matt. v. 24.) 
" Call none your father upon earth, neither be 
ye called masters; for one is your Master — 
Christ." (Ibid, xxiii. 9, 10.) "If a man will 
contend with thee in judgment and take away 
thy coat, let go thy cloak also imto him." 
(Ibid. V. 40.) " Give to every one that asketh 
of thee ; and from him that taketh away thy 
goods ask them not again." (Luke vi. 30.) 
" When thou makest a dinner or supper, call 
not thy Mends nor thy brethren." (Ibid. xiv. 
12.) _ 

Faith is one. The means which Christ ap- 
pointed to obtain that Faith must, of its nature, 
lead to unity. Has the Bible, as the only rule 
of faith, produced unity of belief among those 
who are so loud in its praises ? No sooner did 
Luther proclaim his principle against the au- 



THE BEBLE NOT THE EULE OF FATTH. 8? 

chority of tlie Cliiircli, and of Tradition, than 
he witnessed and deplored the sad but inevita- 
ble consequences which flowed from it. In 
1526, Carlstadt, Zwingle, and Oecolampadius 
established their Sacramentarianism, or the 
figurative presence, in opposition to Luther's 
Eeal Presence. In 1527, Paccomannus and 
Eothman introduced their Anabaptism. The 
Lutherans, as Oecolampadius objected to them, 
were divided among themselves. There were 
Antinomians, Osiandrians, Majorists, Syner- 
gists, Stancarians, Amsdorfians, Flaccians, Sub- 
stantiatians, Accidentarians, Adiaphorists, Mus- 
culans, and Ubiquists. 

In 1538, John Calvin left his master Zwin- 
gle and set up for himself. Luther wrote of 
him and his heresy : " I scarcely ever read of a 
more deformed heresy ; divided, in its begin- 
ning, into so many heads, such a number of 
sects, not one like another ^ and such variety 
and disagreeing of opinion" (Op., tom. Y) ; in 
another place (Op., tom. 6), he says that " six 
or seven sects of them had risen in only two 
years, space." 

Servetus claimed his right to interpret the 
Bible according to his understanding and the 
dictates of his conscience, but he was con- 
demned to the flames by Calvin. 



84 THE BIBLE NOT THE KIJLE OF FAITH. 

Jolin BocHiold, a tailor of Leyden, declared 
that the King of Zion was at hand, that God 
had raised him up to establish twelve Judges 
oyer Israel. He took the goyernment of Miin- 
ster into his own handu, appointed twenty-six 
apostles to propagate his new scripture doc 
trine, but was surprised by death before he 
could accomplish his design. He had, how- 
eyer, time to obey the motions of his interior 
spirit, which told him to marry eleyen wives, 
and to kill them after he had married them. 
(Brandt, tom. i., p. 46 ; Mosheim, vol. iv., p. 
542.) Hermann is taught by the spirit to de- 
clare himself the Messiah, and to kill all the 
priests and magistrates in the world. (Brandt, 
p. 51.) David George proclaims himself the 
true Son of God. (Mosheim, vol. iv., p. 484.) 
Nicholas, his disciple, goes over to England, 
pronounces to the world that the feelings of 
Divine love constitute the essence of religion, 
and professes to remain in sin that grace may 
abound. (Ibid.) Venner is taught by the 
spirit that Jesus is the only lawful sovereign, 
and that neither he nor his followers would 
sheathe tha sword till they had made Babylon 
(Monarchy) a hissing and a curse, not only in 
England but also in foreign countries. (See 
Milner's End of Controv., Letter vi.) 



THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF FAITH. 85 

Menno founded the Mennonites, and Count 
Zinzendorf the Hernlintters. 

The Anabaptists, in their turn, soon divided 
into a variety of sects. 

The Adamites believed in the necessity of 
walking about in a state of nudity. 

The Apostolics understood Christ's words 
literally, that whatever they had heard in se- 
cret, they should preach on the house-tops. 

The Taciturns, on the contrary, refused 
all information, and the preaching of the 
Gospel. 

The Perfect understood the words, " "Wo to 
you that laugh, for you shall weep," in the 
strictest sense, and forbade any one the privi- 
lege of evdr smiling. 

The Innocents, or Impeccables, held, that 
man, after baptism, was sinless, and, therefore, 
need not say : " forgive us our trespasses," 
which words they accordingly ordered to be 
left out of the Lord's Prayer. 

The Libertines disavowed all authority, tem- 
poral and spiritual. 

The Sabbatarians contended, on Scriptura 
grounds, for the observance of the Sabbath, in 
stead of the Sunday. 

The Clancularians held, that man may dis- 
semble his own faith, and profess that of others; 
8 



86 THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 



wliilst the Manifestarians taught tlie contrary 
doctrine. 

There were Weepers, who professed the 
necessity of tears ; and Eejoicers, who taught 
that Gpd loveth a cheerful giver. 

The Abecedarians held the knowledge of 
reading as essential to salvation. 

There were, also, Sanguinarians, who taught 
that the blood of Christians was an agreeable 
sacrifice to the Lord. 

Arminians repudiated Calvin's absolute pre- 
destination to sin and damnation. And the 
Collegians, seeing the absurdity of establishing 
a Church in which there should be unity of 
faith, left every man free to believe what he 
pleases, without any regard to confessions of 
faith, catechisms, or decisions of synods. 

But why should we weary our readers with 
an endless catalogue of so-called Churches, 
which have sprung up since the year 1517, all 
defending their own faith, with the Bible in 
hand, against their several antagonists. Let us 
sum up the various sects, which, according to a 
book now before us, entitled, "An Origmal 
History of the Eeligious Denominations, at 
Present Existing in the United States," unhap- 
pily divide our country. There we find Old 
and New Ppesbyterians ; Associate, and Ke- 



THE BIBLE NOT THE KULE OF FAITH. 87 

formed, and Cumberland Pi?esbyterians ; Lutli- 
erans; Dutch Eeformed; German Reformed 
Churches ; Evangelical Lutherans ; Baptists ; 
> Free- Will Baptists ; Seyenth Day Baptists ; 
Baptist Brethren, German Seventh Day Bap- 
tists, and — as we have sometimes heard and 
read of — Hard and Soft Shell Baptists; 
Methodists, — The Methodist Society, The 
Methodist Episcopal, and Methodist Protest- 
ant Churches, The Eeformed Methodist, and 
finally, the true TVesleyan Methodist Church. 
Here, too, we find Mennonites, and Eeformed 
Mennonites; Shakers and Quakers; Seekers 
and Finders ; Tunkers and Eestorationists, Mil- 
lenarians and New Jerusalemites ; Schwenk- 
felders and Second Advent Men ; United 
Brethren in Christ; Congregationalists, Uni- 
versalists, Unitarians, Moravians, Christians, 
True Christians, Saints, and Latter -Day 
Saints. To these, in the new edition, the 
author will have to add, the Spiritualists, and 
Freelovers, besides others which have since 
arisen. 

These divisions and subdivisions of sects, are 
the logical offspring of the principle laid down 
by the so-called father of the Eeformation. 
Luther saw it in his own day. " Men," says 
he, are now come to such a pitch of disorder, 



88 THE BIBLE NOT THE KULE OF FAITH. 

that they stand no longer in need of any 
teacher ; every man now gives the law to him- 
self." 

Writing to the Christians of Antwerp, he 
says : " The devil has got among you ; he daily 
sends me visitors to knock at my door. One 
will not hear of Baptism ; another rejects the 
Sacrament of the Eucharist ; a third teaches, 
that a new world will be created by God before 
the day of judgment ; another, that Christ is 
not God ; in short, one this, and another that ■ 
there are almost as many creeds as individuals. 
There is no booby, who, when he dreams, does 
not believe himself visited by God, and who 
does not claim the gift of prophecy. I am 
visited by these men, who claim to be favored 
by visions, of which they all know more than 
I do, and which they undertake to teach me. 
I would be glad if they were what they profess 
to be. 

"No later than yesterday one came to me : 
' Sir, I am sent by Almighty God, who created 
Heaven and earth and then he began to 
preach to me as a veritable idiot, that it was 
the order of God, that I should read the books 
of Moses for him. ' Ah, where did you find 
this commandment of God V ' In the Gospel oi 
St. John.' After he had spoken much, I said 



THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 89 

to him : ' Friend, come back to-morrow ; for I 
cannot read for yon, at one sitting, tlie books 
of Moses. 'Good-bye, master, tbe Heavenly 
Father, -who shed His blood for us, will show 
us the right way, through His Son Jesus. 
Amen.' Luther adds : " While the papacy 
lasted^ there were no such divisions or dissen- 
tions.^^ ..." A spirit of confusion is among 
you and he concludes : " Begone, ye cohorts 
of devils — marked with the character of error. 
God is a Spirit of Peace, and not of dissen- 
sions." (Dr. Mart. Luther, Briefe, tom. iii., 60.) 

Well did Munzer answer a Lutheran, who 
appealed to the Bible for the truth of what he 
advanced, " The Bible ? Babel ! For, never 
was there a book which produced greater con- 
fusion in the minds of men than the Bible, in- 
terpreted by every one's private reason." 

" The unrestricted reading of the Bible," said 
the learned Protestant Archbishop Bramhall, 
" is more injurious to religion, than all the re- 
straints of the Catholics." These two words," 
writes the accomplished Selden, " Search the 
Scriptures, have undone the world." "The 
Bible, the Bible," says Bishop Hare, " is the 
religion of the Protestant ; and so say all the 
heretics and schismatics that ever were." 

"Scripture," writes the renowned Hooker, 
8* 



90 THE BIBLE NOT THE KULE OF FAITH. 

" may be abused to any purpose." Thus it was 
made by the Presbyterians to prove, that what- 
ever we do, if we be not directed by it, the 
same is sin. Thus the French Protestants 
would not pay their rents, pretending to 
scrapie it, unless their landlords could bring a 
text to prove that they should pay them. 

The results of interpreting the Bible by pri- 
vate judgment alone, in Germany, are thus 
graphically described in a sermon preached by 
the Eev. Mr. Eose, in the college of Cam- 
bridge, England, and dedicated to the Bishop 
of Chester. " From the state of Protestantism 
in Germany, a stronger and perhaps more im- 
portant lesson is offered, on that subject which 
is said to form the lase and the loast of Prot- 
estantism — the right of private judgment. 
The terrible evils resulting in the German 
Church from its exercise, are the strongest 
practical proof of the wisdom and necessity of 
restraining it. Among the German divines it 
is a favorite doctrine that it is impossible there 
could have been a miracle, and the words of 
Scriptm^e are examined, and forced into any 
meaning but their own. By some the mkacles 
are said to be that mythology, which must at- 
tend every religion,to gain the attention of the 
multitude; by some the common and well 



THE BIBLE NOT THE KIJLE OF FAITH. 91 



known ribaldry of the infidel is unsparingly 
used; by one or more, high in station in the 
Church, some artifice, and probably magnetism, 
has been, even within the last ten years, sug- 
gested ; others go so far as to attack the whole 
body of the prophets as impostors, in most out- 
rageous and revolting terms. This doctrine is 
taught by divines from the pulpit — by Pro- 
fessors from the chairs of theology. It is ad- 
dressed to the old, to free them from ancient 
prejudices, and to the young, as the knowledge 
which can make them truly wdse. This abdi- 
cation of Christianity is not confined either to 
tJie Lutheran or the Calvinist profession, but 
extends its withering influence with baneful 
force over each. It is curious to observe in 
what way they get rid of all miracles. Pro- 
fessor Paulus, in his critical commentary as- 
sures us, that the man with the withered hand 
had only a luxation of the shoulder, which 
Jesus perceiving, pulled it into joint." 

Professor Schultness explains the same mira- 
cles as follows : 

" The man had a severe rheumatism ; Christ 
observing that his blood was much, moved, by 
the indignation with which he heard the 
question of the Pharisees, said to him in that 
favorable moment : ' Stretch out thine hand ! 



92 THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF FAITH. 

the man attempted to do it, and was healed 
becanse that extraordinary excitement had 
removed the impediment under which he la- 
bored. When Christ restored sight to the 
blind man, the poor fellow had snch weakness 
in his eyelids, that he conld not keep his eyes 
open. Christ, observing that he never made 
the attempt to open them, said to him : ' Thoii 
shalt open thine eyes ! ' the confidence of the 
man was so great that, making the attempt 
with all his might, he opened his eyes. Christ 
never walked on the waves, but on the shore, 
or He swam behind the ship, or He walked 
through the shallows. The daughter of Jairus 
was not dead, because Christ Himself said: 
' She sleepeth.' When Jesus said to Peter : 
' Thou shalt catch a fish, and find in its mouth 
a piece of money ; ' the meaning is : before you 
can sell it for so much, you must open its 
mouth, and take out the hook. At Cana, in 
Galilee, Jesus gave a nuptial present of very 
fine wine, with which, for a joke. He filled the 
waterpots of stone. The paralytic was an idle 
fellow, who for thirty years had moved neither 
hand nor foot. Christ asked him ironically : 
' Perhaps thou wouldst be whole ? ' This irony 
stirred him up ; he forgot his hypocrisy." 
It will not do to say that these are the abuse? 



THE BIBLE NOT THE ETJLE OF FAITH. 9o 

of the principle, and that abuses prove nothing 
against the truth of the principle. This obser- 
vation would hold, if the principle itself did 
not logically lead to these abuses. "When you 
tell the world that the Founder of Christianity 
left no other rule by which to come to true 
faith in Him, than the written word, to be read 
and interpreted by every man and woman, you 
lay down a principle which necessarily paves 
the way to all these disorders. It is useless to 
tell these men that they do not read the Scrip- 
tures prayerfully ; that they do not ask for the 
Spirit, who is given to all those who ask ; for 
the moment they reply that they have done all 
this, you cannot object to the conclusions which 
they draw from your own premises. And who 
is to judge between you and them, as to which 
of the two reads the Scripture as It should be 
read ? They have as much right as you, to in- 
terpret the conditions and dispositions of mind 
and heart which must precede and accompany 
the reading. They have a perfect right to re- 
tort the argument on yourself, and there is no 
appeal to any court, which can decide between 
you, since you place the ultimate power of de- 
cision in the very book which you both inter- 
pret. 

Just suppose that our Constitution were 



94 THE BIBLE NOT THE KULE OF FAITH. 

j)laced in our hands, witli this principle for 
our guidance in perusing it. Head this Con 
stitution, interpret it for yourself. Whatever, 
upon careful study, you shall decide is its mean 
ing, that is the meaning of the book. How 
many of us will read it in the same spirit, and 
find in it the same identical meaning ? Per- 
haps not a thousand in ten or twenty millions 
will interpret every article and clause in the 
same sense. And yet the Constitution can 
have but one true sense and meaning in every 
one of its articles or clauses. How will you 
settle the difference ? Not by the Constitution, 
for it is about it you differ ; not by appealing 
anew to your convictions ; for your minds are 
honestly made up, that you have the only true 
meaning of the document. An appeal to phy- 
sical force is the only alternative that remains ; 
— ^precisely what we are learning at so fearful 
an expense of money and men in the present 
lamentable war. And yet we have a supreme 
tribunal, whose judicial sentence we were 
taught was to be considered final, on all mat- 
ters coming within the sphere of its extensive 
jurisdiction. Unity is an impossibihty, where 
every one is sovereignly free to interpret for 
himself any doctrines or practical regulations, 
whether in the family, in the State, or in the 



THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF FAITH. 95 



Cliurcli. Tliere mnst needs be a living tiibu- 
nal, from whose judgment tliere is no appeal. 

But, it may be urged, do not the Scriptures 
themselves lay this religious obligation on every 
man? Why otherwise do we read? — "And 
these words which I command thee this day, 
shall be in thy heart : and thou shalt tell them 
to thy children ; and thou shalt meditate upon 
them, sitting in thy house, and walking on thy 
journey, lying down and rising up. And thou 
shalt bind them as a sign on thy hand ; and 
they shall be as frontlets between thy eyes. 
And thou shalt write them in the entry, and 
on the doors of thy house." (Deut. vi. 6-9.) 
Here is one of those passages of Holy "Writ, 
whose meaning is open to diverse interpreta- 
tions. That the words are not to be under- 
stood literally, is proved by the conduct of our 
adversaries themselves, for they surely do not 
do all that is j)rescribed by the texts. Then 
there is no question of reading the words, but 
of telling them orally to their children, of med- 
itating upon them, etc. This they could do, 
by having them taught the decalogue, of which 
these texts make mention, and which Moses 
was commanded to teach the people. From 
Isaiah (liv. 13): "All thy children shall be 
taught of the Lord," they conclude that the 



96 THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF FAITH. 



Bible sliall be the rule of faith; but how this 
inference is logically contained in the premises 
we cannot see. Were not the J ews taught by 
the Lord in person, when He came to preach 
His Gospel? And did not Christ Himself 
apply that text to His own teaching in J ohu 
vi. 45, saying : " It is written in the prophets ' 
and they all shall le taught of God subjoin 
ing immediately : " Every one that hath heard 
of the Father and hath learned^ cometh to me !" 

"After those days, saith the Lord, I will 
give My laws in their inward parts, and I will 
write it in their heart ; and I will be their God, 
and they shall be My people. And they shall 
teach no more every man his neighbor, and 
every man his brother : for all shall know Me 
from the least of them even to the greatest." 
(Jer. xxxi. 33, 34.) 

Orthodox and rationalist Protestants, in our 
day, interpret these texts to mean simply the 
greater facility, which believers in the New 
Dispensation will have, to know the law of 
God, and the wider diffusion of the doctrine 
of Monotheism, after the return of the Jews 
from Babylon. But what connection has this 
interpretation with the promise or command 
that every one should acquire his knowledge 
of religion by leading the Bible % 



THE BIBLE NOT TBTE ETJLE OF FAITH. 97 



The fact is, there is no use ia examining 
any of the texts of the Old or New Testaments, 
by which our separated brethren endeavor to 
prove their right to interpret the Bible by their 
own private judgment, unless they prove : 

First. That a given text commands the 
reading of the Bible as the only rule of Faith. 

Secondly. That this command applies to all 
without exception. 

This command they seem to have found in 
the words of Christ to the Jews (John, v. 39): 
" Search the Scriptures, for in them you think to 
have life everlasting; and the same are they 
that give testimony to me." But first of all, it is 
not settled among the learned, whether tlie word 
Epsvvare should be translated by the second 
person of the present, or the imperative mode. 
St. Cyril of Alexandria, and some modern com- 
mentators, maintain that Christ stated a mere 
fact, and that He gave no command. In that 
case we should read the passage : " Ye search 
the Scriptures." Secondly, most interpreters 
consider these words addressed, not to the Jews 
at large, but to the Pharisees, the doctors, and 
expounders of the law, whom He wished to 
convince of the divinity of His mission, by an 
appeal first to the testimony of St. John the 

Baptist, next to His miracles, and lastly to the 
9 



98 THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 

Scriptures of whicli they were the expounders. 
And this seems to be the real purport of His 
words, for he adds : " If ye did believe Moses, 
ye would perhaps believe Me also. For he 
wrote of Me." (Ibid. 46.) This is the more 
probable, when we consider that the Jews did 
not, as a general thing, read the Bible ; but 
had it read to them, as is plain from Deut. 
xxxi. 11, 12. They were forbidden to read the 
whole of it till a certain age. Moreover, they 
got their Bible only successively, and certain 
portions of it were penned only towards the 
end of their existence as a nation. They were 
never taught that it alone was every man's rule of 
faith ; for our Saviour spoke in perfect accord- 
ance with their established rule and practice, 
when he said : " The Scribes and Pharisees sit 
upon the chair of Moses. All things^ therefore, 
whatsoever they shall say to you, observe ye 
and do." (Matt, xxiii. 2.) They had to learn, 
to hear, not to judge for themselves. Again, 
our Saviour does not seem to approve their 
reading of the Scriptures, for he adds, with a 
kind of sarcasm : " for ye think ye have in them 
everlasting life." He does not say, Te Tcnow^ 
ye are coruvinced^ that in them ye have ever- 
lasting life ; but — ye think : in the saijie man- 
ner as He said of the heathens and their 



THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF FAITH. 99 



mucli speaking in prayer. Observe, more- 
over, that Christ refers to the testimony of the 
Scriptm-es for one point of doctrine only, a 
point which was clearly and distinctly estab 
lished in all, to wit : the divinity of His mis- 
sion, and He by no means asserts that they are 
capable of finding the whole truth by readmg 
the whole Scriptures. Suppose that the Execu- 
tive should refer the people to the laws for a 
certain decision, in a given case, it would not 
follow thence that the people are competent to 
sit in judgment upon the law itself, and infalli- 
bly decide its meaning in every case. 

" Now these [the Bereans] were more noble 
than those in Thessalonica, who received the 
word with all eagerness, daily searching the 
Scriptm^es, whether these things were so." 
(Acts, xvii. 11.) 

You see, thence, exclaim our separated 
friends, that even in the days of St. Paul, the 
Scriptures were read by the people. 

We grant the fact, that the still unconverted 
Bereans, did, on that occasion, search the Scrip- 
tures ; but we deny that they received a com- 
mand to do so, or that they were even commend- 
ed for so doing. For, the epithet " more noble^^ 
does not necessarily qualify the Bereans as 
searching the Scriptm^es, but may qualify them 



100 THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 



as receiving more eagerly than did the Thessalo- 
nians, the Word of God, when it was preached 
to them by St. Paul ; and this is obvionsly the 
meaning of the passage : for, jnst before, the 
author of the Acts tells us that the Jews 
of Thessalonica, moved with envy at Paul's 
preaching, took unto them " some -wicked men 
of the vulgar sort^ and, raising a mob, set the 
city in an uproar." (Ibid. 5.) The writer, 
evidently, praises the noble behavior of the 
Bereans towards the Apostles while preaching, 
and contrasts it with the ill conduct of the 
Jews in Thessalonica. Finally, who dare say 
that they read the Scriptures with the view of 
finding fault, if they could, with St. Paul's 
preaching ? In that, the Evangelist could not 
possibly have commended such a course of con- 
duct, nor could our separated friends them- 
selves, approve of it. How, then, did the 
Bereans search the Scriptures ? With no other 
view than to verify the genuineness of St. 
Paul's citations, and thus convince themselves 
that the texts were really to be found in the 
places indicated by the preacher. ITor do we 
object to this process. We, too, refer our 
hearers to the Scriptures, and give them all the 
liberty to verify the passages which we quote ; 
yea, more, to convince themselves that the doc- 



THE BIBLE NOT THE ETJLE OF FAITH. 101 

trine which is taught from the text, is the very 
doctrine which the Scripture teaches. We do, 
in these lectures. We allege proof upon 
proof, from Holy Writ, to show our separated 
brethren, that our own doctrine has its founda- 
tion in the written Word of God, while theirs 
can jfind no sanction in the inspired volume. 
But this does by no means imply, that the 
faithful, who have believed abeady, should 
test the Word of God which has been preached 
to them, by the written Word, as if they were 
allowed to doubt the veracity of the Word 
which was preached to them. This would be 
a contradiction. For, on the one hand, they 
would believe, and on the other, they would 
doubt, the Word of God. They would first 
receive it from the lips of the preacher, and be- 
lieve it as the Word of God ; and, at the same 
time they would doubt it, until they should 
convince themselves, by reading, that it was 
the Word of God. Precisely the inconsistency 
into which our separated brethren fall, when 
their ministers tell the people that the Bible is 
their only rule of faith, and in the same breath 
assert that the ministry was appointed by 
Christ to spread and propagate the Gospel. 
These good people go every Sabbath to hear 

the Word of God delivered by one of their 

9* 



102 THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF rATTH. 

ministers, and when they have heard it, they 
can not yet believe, until, by their own read- 
ing, and private judgment, they have proved 
to themselves, that their minister taught them 
the truth. Of what use are Gospel preachers 
among them ? The same may be said of con- 
fessions of faith, catechisms, and the like; all 
of which are drawn up by fallible men, who 
may have been mistaken, and the correctness 
of whose doctrines must be tested by the Bible. 
We oftentimes wondered at this inconsistency 
of our brethren, the more so, that it is accom- 
panied with heavy expenses, levied upon the 
members of the various churches. To support 
a minister and his household, who can, at most, 
preach only his personal views of the Bible — 
who can not, in the name of an infallible 
Church, declare the truth, as it is in Jesus — 
seems to us an absurdity. 

Their next proof is drawn from the words of 
St. Paul to Timothy (2 Tim. iii. 16): "Every 
Scripture divinely inspired, is profitable for 
teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruc- 
tion in justice." Who ever denied this truth ? 
But, does it follow thence, that the Scripture 
is intended to be every man's only rule ot 
faith ? By no means. The words are addressed 
to a bishop, who is, of right, a doctor of the 



THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 103 

law — a teacher and preacher of the Gospel — 
who must necessarily study the Scriptures, in 
order that he may instruct the ignorant, re- 
prove the wicked, correct abuses, and guide his 
flock in the ways of righteousness. But, if 
every one were to read the Scriptures, as all- 
sufficient for these purposes, where would be 
the teachers, correctors, and instructors ? Then, 
it would be true, that we should have no need 
of any man teaching his neighbor, or his 
brethren ; for then, all would know the truth, 
by reading the Scriptures only, "from the 
least of them, even to the greatest. (Jer. 
xxxi. 34.) 

Observe, that the foregoing texts plainly 
contradict those Scriptures in which preaching 
the Gospel to every creature, and teaching all 
nations, are laid down as the means by which 
we are to come to the knowledge of faith; 
they contradict the texts which teach that 
whoever does not hear those whom Christ 
sends, does not hear Him ; that we must hear 
the Church; that Christ appointed some to 
be apostles, others evangelists, others doctors ; 
that the spirit of error is known by the fact, 
that there are those who refuse to hear the 
ministers of Jesus Christ. 

But, we are asked, was not my reason given 



104 THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 

me as a guide in all things, that concern my 
own interests ? And what concerns me more 
intimately than the knowledge of the truths 
which Christ has deigned to reveal to me for 
my happiness in time, and in eternity ? 

No doubt, our reason was given us to attain 
the end for which we were created ; and since 
the knowledge of the truths of revelation is ne- 
cessary to reach that end, our reason must be the 
medium by which to come to that knowledge. 
But God may have willed that reason should 
be assisted in the attainment of that necessary 
knowledge. It does not follow, that each in- 
dividual reason is, therefore, of itself, sufficient 
to grasp that knowledge. Providence, no 
doubt, intended that the various nations of 
the world should be linked together by the 
bonds of social intercourse ; therefore, that 
they should exchange thoughts and feelings 
with each other; but it does not follow thence, 
that every individual should have physical 
power to swim the seas or lakes which inter- 
vene between them. He may have willed, 
that there should be vessels to transport them 
across the waters, and that there should be 
captains to guide those vessels. So, He may 
have willed that, to reach the haven of salva- 
tion by the chart and compass of His Word, 



THE BIBLE NOT THE EULE OF FAITH. 105 

there should be those who, with infallible 
knowledge, should steer ns across the ocean of 
this world, lest, if left to ourselves, we might 
be tossed to and fro by every wind of doctrine; 
lest, being our own teachers in things which 
are hard to understand, we might wrest them 
unto onr own destruction. (2 Peter, iii. 16.) 
We do not exercise onr freedom less, by asking 
the advice of others, and following it, than by 
guiding ourselves. If, by our own reason, we 
have discovered motives sufficiently strong to 
rely on the judgment of others, skilled, and, in 
our present case, appomted by Heaven, to di- 
rect, and guide us unto good, we exercise our 
freedom by following them, as thoroughly, and 
more so, than if we were to proceed in our 
ignorance. 

Were the Apostles slaves because they were 
bound to hear their Master, and to understand 
Him in the sense in which He spoke to them ? 
If the same authority should continue to exist 
now, as we shall prove hereafter, that it does 
exist, where is the slavery in following its voice, 
or obeying its injunctions ? Would not such a 
voice be the voice of truth, and are we not 
truly free where the truth makes us free? 
Man's slavery, is in error and in doubt, not in 
the truth. The Pagan might as well conclude 



106 THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 

that lie needs no revelation from Heaven, be- 
cause his reason is given him to know all 
truth that is necessary for his temporal and 
eternal happiness. Yet this erroneous princi- 
ple underlies the Protestant rule of private 
interpretation. It denies the right of guidance 
and instruction not only to men, but to God 
Himself. For, while it proclaims the divine 
Word as our sole guide in matters of religion, 
it is our own proud reason which it is intended 
shall direct us. This truth is evident to every 
one who reflects upon the facts in the case. 
First, it is reason which must decide what is, 
and what is not, the Word of God ; so that, 
whatever books or chapters of Scripture reason 
rejects, even should they chance to be the 
Word of God, they cease to be such, merely 
because reason has so decided. Secondly, the 
objective truth of the books which reason ap- 
proves as divinely revealed, must obey the 
subjective understanding of every individual, 
so that man's sense is God's sense, and man's 
mind the mind of the Eevealer. Who does 
not see, that this principle is, at bottom, the 
same which the enemy of our race held up to 
our common mother. Eve, when he said, in or- 
der to dissuade her from obeying the command 
of God : " No ; ye surely shall not die ; for 



THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 107 

God doth know, that on whatever day ye shall 
eat thereof, your eyes shall be opened : and yon 
shall be as God, knowing good and evil." 
(Gen. iii. 4, 5.) 

In fine, the principle of onr separated breth- 
ren can never effect the designs of the Founder 
of Christianity. If our Saviour intended the 
Bible to be the world's only rule of faith, then, 
the world should have been converted by the 
reading of the Sacred Yolume. And yet, 
what is the historic fact ? Can our separated 
brethren point out a single nation, or tribe, 
which has been converted to Christianity by 
the reading of the Bible alone ? AH history is 
there to prove, that the nations, which at any 
time previous to the so-called Eeformation, re- 
nounced the worship of their idols, and em- 
braced the Christian religion, were converted 
by the authoritative preaching of the zealous 
Apostles who went among them. The same 
success has attended the Catholic rule of faith 
since the dawn of the Eeformation, as we shall 
have occasion to prove in our next lecture. 
How comes it that the Protestant rule has 
proved so barren, and that of the Catholic 
Church so fruitful in converting the world to 
Christ and the Gospel ? Does not the failure 
of the one prove its want of Divine sanction, 



108 THE BIBLE NOT THE RULE OF FAITH. 

and tlie success of tlie others the approbation of 
Heaven ? 

Oh, that our friends would open their eyes 
to so important, so vital a subject ! Their eter- 
nity depends upon it. "He that believeth 
not," says the Saviour, " shall be damned.' 
(Mark, xvi. 16.) " Without faith," says the 
inspired Apostle, "it is impossible to please 
God." (Heb. xi. 6.) And yet, as we have 
proved, faith, on the principle of our separated 
brethren, is impossible. Hence their salvation 
is impossible, so long as they wilfully and ob- 
stinately refuse to embrace that only saving 
rule of faith, with the nature of which we are 
to acquaint you in the following lecture. 



III. 



THE CHUECH OF CHEIST. 

"All power is given to me in Heaven and on earth. 
Going, therefore, teach ye all nations ; baptizing them in 
the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy 
Ghost ; teaching them to observe aU things whatsoever I 
have commanded you ; and behold I am with you all days, 
even to the consummation of the world." Matt, xxviii. 
18, 19, 20. 

Ik the preceding lecture we have proved tliat 
the Bible alone, interpreted by private judg- 
ment, could not be and is not the rule of faith. 
What then is the rule established by the Foun- 
der of Christianity, through which all are to 
come, and can easily, securely, and certainly 
come, to the knowledge of the faith, without 
which it is impossible to please God, without ^ 
which, all that are capable of faith shall be 
damned. We answer, the infallible Church of 
Christ, which is at once the commissioned 
guardian, interpreter and judge of all the doc- 
trines, that Christ ever taught, and that are 

to be belibved unto salvation. This assertion 
10 



110 



THE CHUECH OF CHRIST. 



snpposes or assumes that Christ established a 
Church, but one Church, and that Church still 
exists. These assumptions need to be proved, 
and as they are matters of fact, we shall appeal 
to history. But before we do so, it maybe well 
to define what we mean by the word church, 
especially as many wrong notions are current 
on this subject among our adversaries, both 
Protestants and Eationalists. We scarcely 
need stop to declare the nominal definition. 
The word Chiu'ch, taken literally from the 
Greek, means, a calling out, or convocation, 
assembly, or meeting, of some or many indivi- 
duals. Figuratively, it signifies, at times, a 
place of meeting, as in Judith (vi. 21) : "And 
afterwards all the people were called together, 
and they prayed all the night long, within the 
Church." At other times it means a society 
or assembly of the faithful, living or meeting 
in the same town or province ; thus St. Paul 
(Pom. xvi. 3, 5) writes : " Salute Prisca and 
Aquila . . . and the Church which is in their 
house." And again (ibid. 16): "All the 
Churches of Christ salute you." So we read of 
the Church of the Corinthians, Thessalonians, 
etc. It is also taken for the faithfal all over 
the earth. St. Paul uses it in this sense when 
he writes to the Ephesians (i. 17, 22) : "That 



THE CHUECH OF CHEIST. 



Ill 



the God of our Lord Jesus Christ . . . hath made 
Him head over all the Church." And Acts, 
XX. 28 : " Take heed to yourselves, and to all 
the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath 
placed you Bishops, to rule the Churcli of 
God." Not unfrequently it refers to the 
teaching or governing portion only, or the 
Pastors of the Church. In this sense, Christ says 
(Matth. xviii. 17) : "And if he will not hear 
the Church, let him be to thee as the heathen 
and the publican." 

The real definition, with which we have to 
do in this lecture, is given by Bellarmine in 
these words : " The Church is a society of men 
on earth, imited together by the profession of 
one and the self-same Christian faith, and the 
communion of the same sacraments, under the 
government of lawful Pastors, and especially of 
the Eoman Pontiff." (Bell, De EccL, lib. iii., 
c. 11.) 

That there exists such an institution upon 
earth, is evident to every one who has eyes to 
see and ears to hear. There is a society of men 
spread all over the world, called the Eoman 
Catholic Church, whose members, to the num- 
ber of at least one hundred and fifty millions^ 
assert and maintain that Christ is their Found- 
er. They profess the same faith, participate in 



112 



THE CHUECH OF CHEIST. 



the same sacraments, obey their respective 
bishops, and, with the latter, are subject to ^the 
Eoman pontiff, otherwise called the Pope^ iWt' 

You find, besides this Universal or Catholic 
Church, smaller societies that call themselves 
Christian, though separated from the society of 
Eoman Catholics, in doctrine, sacraments, and 
government ; and yet agreeing with us in the be- 
lief, that Christ established a society of followers, 
called His or Christ's Church. The proof of 
this fact can be traced back to the very first 
ages of the Christian era. Add to this, as in- 
contestable proofs, the histories which have 
been written, the temples which have been 
erected, the altars and other monuments of 
Christian art, extant for ages among nearly all 
nations and peoples. Witness in the first 
centuries the "Apologies " of the Christian re- 
ligion, in which we always read of a society 
founded by Christ, and in which that society is 
defended as the true Church of Christ against 
the innovations of heresies and schisms. Wit- 
ness the Fathers of the Church, whose historical 
testimony has, to say the least, as much weight 
as that of professed historians themselves. 
Witness the very writings of the heathen phi- 
losophers of the primitive ages, all of whom 
assume the fact that Christ was the Founder of 



TEE CHUECH OF CHRIST. 



113 



the Church which they assailed in their works. 
The persecutions from Nero down to the 
present time prove the same fact, inasmuch as 
they assail not individuals merely, but the sect 
of the Galileans, which called itself Christian, 
and they not unfrequently upbraided them for 
being the followers of a malefactor who was 
crucified. The martyrs, in their turn, bore the 
same testimony by shedding the last drop of 
their blood. From these authorities, so various, 
so constant, so universal, given by men of dif- 
ferent nationalities, education, prejudices, inter- 
ests, in all ages, among all people, we conclude 
that it is proved beyond the shadow of a doubt, 
that Christ was the Founder of an institution 
which He called His Church, and which the 
world has continued to call the Christian 
Church, or the Church of Christ. 

If now we open the Bible, not as the inspired 
word of God, but merely as an historical record 
of facts which happened in the days of its 
authors, we shall find the same distinct and 
evident testimony. In the first place, we read 
that the Founder Himself calls the society of 
His followers. His Church. ^^Upon this rock,'' 
says He to Peter, " I will build my Church." 
(Matt. xvi. 18.) The same fact may be gath- 
ered from the figures or comparisons by which 
10* 



114 TOE CHUKCH OF CHRIST. 



He expresses the idea of His Clmrcli. Some- 
times He compares it to a fold of which He 
Himself is the shepherd (John, x. 1); some- 
times to a marriage feast (Matt. xxii. 2) ; again, 
to a family (Matt. xxiv. 45) ; to a city set on a 
monntain (Matt. v. 14) ; to a kingdom. (John 
xviii. 36.) All these comparisons convey the 
idea of a society, of a visible association, a 
imion of several into one. His acts proclaim 
the same truth. He chooses twelve men to be 
His Apostles (Matt. x. 1) ; He begs His 
Father that they and all those who through 
them shall believe in Him, may be one, as He 
and the Father are one (John, xvii. 20, etc.) ; 
selects Peter as the visible foundation stone, or 
head of the building (Matt. xvi. 18) ; subjects 
to him and the other Apostles, according to 
their rank, the rest of the faithful (ibid, and 
Luke, X. 16) ; gives them power to bind and to 
loose, and constitutes them a tribunal, from 
which there is no appeal. (Matt, xviii. 17.) 
To these He associates seventy-two disciples to 
aid them in the preaching of the Gospel. 
(Luke, X. 1.) 

Then He commands the believers to receive 
and obey these teachers, to be baptized, and to 
receive the rest of the sacraments which He 
instituted for their sanctification. 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



115 



The Apostles, faitliful to their duty, execute 
every command of their Master, with regard to 
the society He had established. They nomi- 
nate and appoint Bishops and Deacons, and 
colaborers in the vineyard of their Lord. They 
do it in His name, with His power, or rather 
Christ continues to do it through them. " He 
who descended, is the same, also, who ascended 
above all the heavens, that He might fulfil all 
things. And some, indeed, He gave to be 
apostles, and some prophets, and others 
evangelists, and others pastors and teachers, 
for the perfection of the saints, for the work of 
the ministry, unto the edification of the body 
of Christ." (Eph. iv. 10, etc.) In the same 
sense the Apostle says : " Take heed to your- 
selves, and to all the flock, over which the 
Holy Ghost hath placed you Bishops, to rule 
the Church of God, which He hath purchased 
with His own blood" (Acts, xx. 28); and: 
" Christ loved the Church, and delivered Him- 
self up for it ; that He might sanctify it by the 
laver of w^ater in the word of life. (Eph. v. 25, 
26.) He speaks of marriage as a great sacra- 
ment, but only in the Church and Christ. (Ibid. 
V. 32.) Do not all these sayings and acts of 
Christ and His Apostles prove beyond any 
cavil that He founded a Church, or society of 



116 



THE CHIJECH OF CHRIST. 



believers, perfect in all its parts, having all tlie 
conditions, all the essential constituents of a 
real, external, visible association, corporation 
or living organic body, with which moreovei 
Ho promises to abide until the consninmation 
of the world (Matt, xxviii. 20) ; and of which 
He was to be the head and vital principle for 
evermore ? 

The end of that society, besides the greater 
glory of His Father, was the salvation of man- 
kind. For the end of the society He fonnded 
was the same as the end or object of His own 
mission. He came to save that which was lost 
(Luke, xix. 10) ; He came that men might have 
life, and that they might have it more abun- 
dantly. (John, X. 10.) 

He intended to perpetuate His own mission 
through His institution or church ; consequently 
He wished the Church to be the representative 
person of that mission. Now, one of the means 
by which He effected His mission was the 
preaching of all the truth necessary to salva- 
tion ; hence, to perpetuate this means. He must 
appoint teachers accredited by Him, as He 
Himself was by the Father, so that like Him 
they could say: "My doctrine is not Mine, 
but of Him who sent me" (John, vii. 16) ; that 
is to say, it is not of man, human ; but of God^ 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



117 



divine. He does so appoint them, saying: 
" As the Father hath sent Me, I also send you." 
(John, XX. 21.) "All power is given to Me in 
Heaven and on earth, going therefore, teach 
all nations," etc. (Matt, xxviii. 18, 19.) Hence 
the Apostle had a right to say : " Let a man 
so look upon us as the ministers of Christ, 
and the dispensers of the mysteries of God." 
(1 Cor. iv. 1.) To Peter the command is 
given : " Feed My lambs ;" " feed My sheep" 
(John, xxi. 15, 17); that is to say, Peter is to 
supply all the means necessary to salvation. 
" To thee I will give the keys of the kingdom 
of Heaven," etc. (Matt. xvi. 19.) He is the 
janitor who must open the gate to this spiritual 
city, this kingdom of Christ on earth. 

If Christ intended to perpetuate His minis- 
try of teaching in and through the Church, it 
follows that He must invest that ministry with 
all the marks of authority which characterized 
His own teaching. If the Church, as teacher, 
had less authority, or her teaching were not as 
fully accredited as His own, the Church could 
not possibly represent the person of Christ, and 
it would not be true that Christ is with that 
Church, that He uses it as His organ, through 
which to preach and teach whatsoever He had 
commanded. 



• 



118 



THE CHUECH OF CHEIST. 



What then were the characteristics of Christ 
as a teacher ? 

The first characteristic of a teacher is his 
visibility. The nature of teaching requires 
pupils to be taught ; teacher and disciple must 
be brought to a communion of mind and ac- 
tion ; both must meet face to face. This law 
God observed from the beginning. He Him- 
self taught Adam face to face, appeared to the 
Patriarch, either directly Himself or through 
the ministry of His angels, revealed Himseli 
and His law to Moses and the prophets, and 
finally, as the Apostle says, "God having 
spoken on divers occasions and many ways, in 
time past, to the Fathers by the Prophets, last 
of all in these days hath spoken to us by his 
Son." (Heb. i. 1.) Jesus was to fulfill the 
Scriptures that were written of Him ; He was 
to die, to rise again, and afterwards ascend into 
Heaven, where now " He sitteth at the right 
hand of the Majesty on high.^' (Heb. i. 3.) 
Yet according to the reasoning of the same 
Apostle, He was not to cease remaining among 
US in that capacity in which He was introduced 
into the world. Hence the Apostle applies to 
Him the texts of the Psalms : " Thy throne, O 
God, is for ever and ever, a sceptre of justice 
is the sceptre of Thy kingdom." (Heb. i. 8.) 



THE CHrKCH OF CHRIST. 



119 



" Thou, in the beginning, O Lord, hast founded 
the earth : and the heavens are the works of thy 
hands. They shall perish, but Thou shalt con- 
tinue: and they shall all grow old as a gar- 
ment. And as a vesture shalt Thou change 
them, and they shall be changed: but Thou 
art the self-same ; and Thy years shall not fail." 
(Ibid. 10-12.) The throne, then, of Christ's 
kingdom, is for ever and ever, and not only the 
throne but the incumbent of the throne is 
to continue the self-same. " Jesus Christ yes- 
terday, and to-day, and the same forever." 
(Heb. xiii. 8.) This is precisely what Christ 
Himself said: "Heaven and earth shall pass 
away, but My words shaU not pass away" 
(Luke, xxi. 33) ; " I will not leave you orphans" 
(John, xiv. 18) ; " I am with you all days, even 
to the consummation of the world." (Matt, 
xxviii. 20.) But Christ is now no longer per- 
sonally on earth ; He dwelleth in the Heavens. 
How then reconcile His presence in Heaven 
with His presence in the Church ? Listen to 
the Apostle again : " Therefore ought we more 
diligently to observe the things which we have 
heard; lest perhaps we should let them slip. 
For if the word, spoken by angels, became 
steadfast, and every transgression and disobe- 
dience received a just recompense of reward : 



130 



THE CHITECH OF CHRIST. 



how shall we escape, if we neglect so great sal' 
vation ? Which having begun to be declared 
by the Lord, was confirmed to ns, by them that 
heard him. God also bearing them witness by 
signs and wonders, and divers miracles and 
distributions of the Holy Ghost, according to 
His own will." (Heb. ii. 1-4.) And, further 
on, the Apostle exalting Christ above Moses, 
says: "Moses indeed was faithful in all his 
house, as a servant, for a testimony of those 
things which were to be spoken. But Christ 
as a Son, in His own house, which house are 
we, if we retain a firm confidence and the 
glory of hope unto the end." (Ibid. iii. 5, 6.) 

The Gospel truths, then, which were hegun 
to be declared by Christ, were confirmed, that 
is, made certain, by the Apostles ; to whom He 
communicated' at the same time, the identical, 
visible means of propagating them, which He 
Himself had employed, such as signs, wonders, 
miracles, and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit. 
Thus Christ continues to live in the Church, 
which He established, as in His own house, 
through the Apostles, His visible representa- 
tives. 

The idea of an invisible church, to which an- 
cient and modern heretics have had recourse, 
is evidently a contradiction in terms. The 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



121 



word chtircli, as we have seen, means a con- 
gregation, a meeting, an assembly. "WTio ever 
heard of an invisible meeting or assembly of 
men and women ? ' 

It is repugnant to the object of the Church, 
which is to spread the true faith, to dispense 
the mysteries or the sacraments, to effect the 
reconciliation of the sinner with God, all of 
which require a visible agency. How could an 
invisible church effect or realize these objects ? 
If the teacher be invisible and therefore in- 
audible, how will the world be taught ? If the 
dispenser of the sacraments be not known, how 
shall the people receive them? How then 
shall the commission of Christ to His Apostles 
be verified ? — " Go ye into the whole world, and 
preach the Gospel to every creature. He that 
believeth and is baptized shall be saved; he 
that believeth not shall be condemned." (Matt, 
xvi. 16.) How these other words ? — " Go ye, 
therefore, and teach all nations ; baptizing them 
in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and 
of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all 
things whatsoever I have commanded you." 
(]\Iatt. xxviii. 19-20.) How are they "the 
light of the world," if that light is hidden un- 
der a bushel ? How is the Church to be the 
mountain of the Lord's house established on 
11 



122 THE CHrECH OF CHRIST. 

the top of tlie mountains and exalted above 
the hills, and how are the nations to flow into 
it, and to be taught in that house, if it is 
hid from their eyes, and the teachers thereof 
are unknown to them ? (Isaiah, ii. 2.) The 
Church is a kingdom, a fold, a city, the house, 
yea, the body of Christ: by what figure of 
speech can these be made ideas of inyisible 
things ? 

How are we to distinguish between ortho- 
doxy and heterodoxy, between the wheat and 
the chaff, between the good and the bad fishes ? 
How are we to discern those that walk circum- 
spectly and those that walk disorderly in the 
house of God? (Eph. v. 15.) How are the 
bishops to reprove, to rebuke, to preach, in sea- 
son and out of season ? (2 Tim. iv. 2.) 

Every society must have laws by which it is 
regulated; these laws must be administered. 
For that purpose, there must be a government 
and officers ; there must be a Constitution, an 
Executive, and a Judiciary. How can all these 
be found in an invisible church? How are 
inferiors to obey their superiors and be subject 
to them ? How shall the superiors watch over 
them for the good of their souls, as having one 
day to give an account of their stewardship 
(Heb. xiii. 17) ; how shall the shepherds feed 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



123 



the slieep, if none of these can be known or 
seen? 

If the true Church of Christ was at any time 
invisible, by what logical premises did you 
come to such a conclusion? Doubtless the 
invisible church must have been visible to you 
who assert; the fact of her invisibility, for other 
wise, you assert a fact of which you have no 
knowledge. If you could get the knowledge 
of the fact, why not others ? If others could 
obtain that knowledge, it was because the in- 
visible church was really visible as invisible, 
could be seen as unseen, which is a contradic- 
tion in terms. Yea, all should be able to see 
the invisible church : for, on the hypothesis 
that she was the true Church of Christ, all were 
bound to be united with her, as the only means 
of salvation. All, then, should have been able 
to see the invisible Church, and yet because 
invisible, none could see it. 

Again : "Where was the invisible Church be- 
fore the so-called Eeformation? Was she in 
one or in all the several churches that existed 
before that time ? What were her conditions 
of membership? Where were the true 
members ? Give us their names, the place or 
places where they lived and died. 

Moreover, did Christ institute a visible or an 



124 



THE CHURCH OF CHEIST. 



invisible Cliurcli ? If the former, your theory 
falls to the gronnd. If the latter, then yon do 
wrong to remain Protestant ; for as a Protestant 
yon are a member of a visible institution, which 
you at least contend is the Church of Christ. 
In either case, therefore, you are, by your own 
confession, out of the pale of the true Church, 
therefore, without the true faith, therefore, un- 
der the displeasure of God, and on the road to 
damnation. 

Christ, who appeared a visible teacher of 
God, and who made His Church His represen- 
tative upon earth, left us, in the first place, a 
visible Church, whose doctrines and sacraments, 
whose government, whose whole nature, are 
open to the eyes of the whole world; — who 
continues, as she ever did, to preach on the 
house-tops what she had heard fi^om the be- 
ginning. Christ, as a teacher, was necessarily 
consistent in His doctrines. Consistency, ob- 
jectively considered, is unity. He that never 
contradicts Himself in speaking, or teaching, 
speaks and teaches one and the same thing on 
the same subject. Christ, therefore, as a true 
teacher, never contradicted Himself. If the 
Church is His organ, if He, as the head, con- 
tinues to speak by her lips, if she is but a per- 
manent incarnation of Himself, she must, like 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



125 



Him, be thoroiiglily consistent in her teacliing ; 
she must be one in her doctrines, so that both 
the teachers and the taught, the shepherds and 
the flock, " be of one mind (Philip, ii. 2), 
speaking the self-same thing. One of the es- 
sential characteristics of Christ's Chnrch, as we 
have seen in the definition, is that the society 
of believers be nnited by the profession of the 
same faith. He who founded her is one, for 
ever the self-same, the God-man Christ Jesus. 
Such then must His body be, such must His 
house be, in which He dwelleth, such the fold 
of which He is the shepherd, the kingdom over 
which He sways the sceptre. Christ is the 
truth y — "I am the truth." (John, xiv. 6.) 
The truth, of its nature, is one ; it cannot Z>(^, 
and not he^ at the same time. The Church, 
therefore, in which that truth resides, which is 
the pillar and the ground of truth, must needs 
be one. The truth and Christ being identified, 
and Christ being identified with His Church, 
the Church is the truth, and is as incapable of 
contradicting herself as Christ Himself. Hence 
it follows that the Church can never teach one 
doctrine in one way, to-day, and in another 
way, to-morrow. Hence it follows that we, at 
the present time, are as certain that when the 

Church speaks as Church, she speaks the truth 
11* 



126 



THE CHUECH OF CHRIST. 



as if we listened to Christ Himself. And this 
He has openly declared. "He that heareth 
yon, heareth Me, he that despiseth you, 
despiseth Me, and he that despiseth Me, 
despiseth Him that sent Me." (Luke, x. 16. 
The Church, therefore, brings ns into im 
mediate contact with God who is the truth. 
It follows further that our act of faith in what 
the Church teaches, is of all other acts the most 
certain, and impairs the most unshaken and 
imshakable conviction. 

Did Christ really impart this unity to Hia 
Church? If not, why did He pray to His 
Father that the Apostles and disciples might 
be one as He and the Father are one ? And 
why did He pray that not they alone, but they 
also who should believe in Him through their 
word might all be one (John, xvii. 21, 22), it 
He did not intend that this unity should re- 
main a characteristic mark of the true Chui'ch ? 
Yea, He Himself declares that this was the 
reason of His prayer : " That the world may 
knowthatThonhast sentMe." (Ibid. 23.) We 
are aware that the prayer of Jesus was always 
heard for His reverence. (Heb. v. 7.) Hence 
His true Church is even now really one in 
doctrine; one in sacraments, one in govern 
ment 



THE CHUECH OF CHRIST. 



127 



Our Saviour said (John, x. 16) : " And other 
sheep I have, that are not of this fold ; them, 
also, I must bring, and they shall hear My 
voice ; and there shall be made one fold, and one 
shepherd." Sheep of one fold are fed together, 
sheltered together, and led together ; go in and 
out together, under the care and vigilance of 
the shepherd who is set over them. If Christ 
has other sheep that must be brought to the one 
same fold, then, the theory that Christ's sheep 
are spread and scattered through many folds, 
led and fed by many shepherds, is a false one, 
and must be rejected ; then, it is not true, that 
the Church is made up of believers in all the 
various and contradictory churches which have 
sprung up in the world, since the beginning of 
Christianity, and especially since the days of 
the so-called Eeformation. 

Again, the Apostle writes, that the Church 
of Christ is his body (Coloss. i. 24), and that 
that body is one, — there is " one body and one 
Spu'it, as you are called in one hope of your 
vocation, one Lord, one faith, one baptism" 
(Eph. iv. 45) ; " We being many, are one body 
in Christ, and each one members one of an 
other." (Rom. xii. 15). How can members 
of different bodies compose one symmetrical 
frame ? Would not such a body resemble that 



128 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



described by Horace in the opening lines of Lis 
" Art of Poetry" ? "Would it not be even more 
monstrQus still? In one body all the mem 
bers obey the same head ; the same will gov 
erns and commands them all. They are snb- 
ordinate — not co-ordinate — ^to each other. On 
the Protestant theory of the right of private 
judgment, every member is independent of the 
other. There is neither subordination nor co- 
ordination possible. Every one strikes out a 
course of thought, and of action, for himself. 
Every one forms a creed of his own ; every 
one determines the nature and the number of 
the sacraments ; every one rules, and no one is 
ruled. There can be no unity in such a body. 

That such unity was one of the characteristic 
marks of the Christian Church is a fact of his- 
tory. " All they that believed were together, 
and had all things common ; they sold their 
possessions and goods, and divided them to all, 
according as every man had need. Aiid, con- 
tinuing daily, with one accord, in the temple, 
and breaking bread from house to house. . . . 
And the Lord added daily to their society such 
as should be saved." (Acts, ii. 44-47.) Unity 
was considered so necessary, that salvation de- 
pended upon it as one of the signs of the true 
faith. " And the multitude of believers had 



THE CHUECH OF CHRIST. 



129 



but cue heart and one soul." (Ibid. iv. 32.) 
There was no such thing as setting up inde- 
pendent churches, or societies of believers. 
It mattered not whether they were Romans, 
Corinthians, Colossians, Ephesians, Cretans or 
Cappadocians, Jews or Samaritans, all those 
who were converted from their various religions 
to the Christian Church, were members of one 
and the same mystical body of Christ, in which 
all national distinctions ceased ; in which there 
was neither Jew nor Greek, bond nor free, male 
nor female, for they were all one in Christ 
Jesus. (Gal. iii. 28.) Heresies, divisions, 
schisms, were not tolerated nor permitted. 
Those who " cause dissensions" were marked 
and avoided (Eom. xvi. 17) ; were regarded as 
antichrists (1 John, ii. 18), and were not looked 
upon as belonging to the Church. " They 
went out from us, but they were not of us ; 
for, if they had been of u.s, they would, no 
doubt, have continued with us. (Ibid. 19.) 

The idea of Christ in founding His Church, 
excludes, therefore, all independent organiza- 
tions, all self-constituted churches, all Congre- 
gationalism, such as we find in our day. His 
idea is concentrative. All the members of His 
Church are one among themselves, all are one 
with the Church, and the Church, with Him. 



130 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



Indi-vidualization was still further from His 
mind. Every individual is, indeed, to believe, 
and to practise tlie obligations laid upon Him ; 
but the faith of one individual is the faith of a 
second, and of a third, and so on, so that the 
faith of every individual member of the Church 
equals the faith of the Chnrch itself ; and the 
faith of both equals the principles of faith, as 
they exist in the mind of Christ, the Author of 
the faith. And there is not only a numerical 
unity as to the precise articles to be believed, 
and the duties to be practised, but a substantial 
and formal unity, which comprises the sense — 
the meaning of these things as they lie in the 
mind of Jesus. Every believer and doer of 
His "Word may say, with truth, that it is now 
no longer he that lives, but Christ that lives in 
him (Gal. ii. 20) ; that he is one with Christ ; 
that he is a Christian — another Christ — ^by liv- 
ing the life of Christ, in spirit and in truth. 

Thus, the ideas of Christ become the ideas 
of the Chnrch, and of every member of the 
Church, and the truth of these ideas as it lies 
in the mind of Christ, lies in the mind of the 
Church, and in the minds of its members. The 
same may be said of the life of the heart. By 
conforming the individual will to the will of 
the Chnrch, which, in her turn, always con- 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



131 



forms hers to the will of Christ, there is a one- 
ness of vitality, of spiritual life, which makes 
lis partakers, through grace, of the Divine 
nature, which causes us to live in Christ, and 
Christ in us, so that we become, after our own 
measure, one in Him, as He is one in the 
Father (John, xvii. 21.) 

To produce this wonderful, this more than 
natural unity, more than a natural authority 
was absolutely necessary. No human power 
was ever able thus to unite the individual 
members of society among themselves or with 
the head of the social body. A material union 
of an outward natm'e, binding the members of 
the same society together by bonds of natural 
and material interests, may be effected and 
maintained for a time. But to cause all to be 
of one mind and one will, to make all think 
and desire the same thing, is a rare spectacle, 
and, so far as we know, never seen on earth, 
except in the Church or Christian society. 
The authority of the State can never reach the 
mind and heart of all its members, so as to 
subject them to its rule. To unite individuals 
after this manner, the head of the social body 
should not only have authority to command, 
but should be able to infuse his own vitality 
into the members. This Christ alone could do 



132 



THE CHUECH OF CHEIST. 



and lias done in His Church. The authority 
of society, although, like all real power, it comes 
from God, is not so intimately identified with 
Him as not to admit a distinction. Human 
authority can act independently of the source 
of its power. It is not infallible. It can abuse 
the trust which it has received of God ; and may 
err concerning the nature and extent of its 
power as well as in the manner of exercising it. 
God grants to the heads of nations the power 
to rule their subjects, but He has not promised 
them that divine assistance by which they shall 
be able to avoid all mistake or abuse in apply- 
ing it. 'Not so with His Church. He has 
lodged His own divine authority in her rulers, 
and He governs in them and by them. He 
communicates it to them by a continual pres- 
ence, by a perpetual influx of His own mind 
into their minds, and of His own will into their 
wills, thus securing them against all possible 
error, not only as to the nature and extent of 
their power, but as to the manner of exercising 
it. He does more. He influences the ruled, in 
turn, by His divine grace and spirit, so as to 
make them at once know the nature and extent 
of the rulers' power, and help them in subject- 
ing themselves heart and soul to it. 

The infallibility of the Church is a privilege 



THE CHTJECH OF CHKIST. 



133 



received by her from Clirist, in virtue of which 
she cannot be deceived, nor deceive others, in 
proposing to the world doctrines of faith and 
morals. Hence, whatever she proposes to be 
believed or practised, is infallibly true, whether 
she proposes these truths from the Bible or 
from Tradition. 

Christ was witness of the truth as He learned 
it from the Father. He was the Judge of that 
truth, and its Teacher. Such is also the three- 
fold office of the Church, and in each she is, 
like Him, infallible. " Behold," exclaimed the 
prophet Isaiah, " I have given Him for a wit- 
ness to the people, for a leader and a master to 
the Gentiles." (Isaiah, Iv. 4.) 

And St. John : " Grace be unto you . . . and 
from Jesus Christ who is the faithful witness . . . 
who hath made us a kingdom and priests to 
God and His Father." (Apoc. i. 4-6.) 

" Amen, amen I say to thee," so spoke Jesus 
to Nicodemus, " we speak what we know, and 
we testify what we have seen, and you receive 
not our testimony." (John, iii. 11.) 

" 1 am one that give testimony of Myself ; 
and the Father that sent Me giveth testimony 
of Me." (Ibid. viii. 18.) 

Christ asserts that His judgment is true, 

" because I am not alone, but I and He that 
12 



13i 



THE CHUKCH OF CHRIST. 



sent me, tlie Father." (John, viii. 16.) He 
judged between falsehood and truth in the doc- 
trines of the Pharisees and condemned their 
innovations. He settled disputes that arose 
between His own Apostles before they were 
imbued with virtue from on High. He came 
unto the world to teach all truth. Both the 
Jews and the Apostles called Him Master and 
Teacher. They bore testimony to His teaching 
" the way of God in truth." (Matt. xii. 38 ; 
xxii. 16.) 

These same offices were by Christ transmitted 
to His Apostles and their successors. " But 
you shall receive the power of the Holy Ghost 
coming upon you, and you shall be witnesses 
unto Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and 
Samaria, and even to the uttermost part of the 
earth." (Acts i. 8.) " We are witnesses," said 
St. Peter, " of all things that He did in the 
land of the J ews and in Jerusalem." (Ibid. x. 
39.) " And He commanded us to preach to the 
people, and to testify that it is He who had 
been appointed by God to be judge of the 
living and of the dead." (Ibid. 42.) 

Tou have but to read the acts of the Apos- 
tles and their epistles to be convinced that they 
claimed and exercised the right, in the name of 
Christ and in the power of the Holy Ghost, to 



THE CHimCH OF CHEIST. 



135 



approve and condemn in matters of doctrine 
and morals and worship, according as circum- 
stances required. 

That they were appointed teachers is evident 
from St. Matt, xxviii. 18, 20. "All power is 
given to Me in Heaven and in earth, go ye, 
therefore, and teach all nations ; baptizing 
them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, 
and of the Holy Ghost — teaching them to ob- 
serve all things whatever I have commanded 
you." 

As a witness, the Church will never mis- 
anderstand nor pervert the truths, concerning 
which she is to testify ; as a judge she will 
never draw from God's word, whether written 
or unwritten, any false meaning or conclusions; 
and as a teacher, she will always propose those 
truths and practices so as safely to provide for 
the salvation of all. Thus the doctrines of 
Christ and of the Apostles, by the infallible 
presence and assistance of Christ and His Holy 
Spirit, shall go down, fi^om age to age, without 
any mixture of error, pure and spotless as they 
came from them. 

This infallibility is absolutely necessary, to 
realize the end for which Christ founded His 
Church. His mission was not a transitory one. 
He came to save, not only those who lived in 



136 



THE CHUECH OF CHRIST. 



His own day and time, but all mankind, of all 
times and ages. He sincerely wished that we, 
and those that are to come after ns, should 
have the same means of salvation as the Jews 
had in His own age and country. For this 
purpose He entrusted His doctrines and His 
sacraments, and the power to govern His 
Church, to His Apostles ; for this purpose He 
promised them His infallible aid and presence ; 
for this purpose He communicated to them the 
fulness of the power which He Himself had 
received from His Father ; for this purpose He 
commanded that all should hear and obey 
them, as if He Himself were personally and 
actually present on earth. But the Apostles 
were mortal men. If He wished all to be saved 
by the same means and in the same way. He 
must have provided for all even until the end 
of time. InTow, the means which He employed 
were the infallible preaching of His word, the 
infallible administration of His sacraments, 
and His government. He must, therefore, con- 
tinue till now to propose His doctrines, to com- 
municate His sacraments, and to govern His 
Church in the same manner. This He does ; 
for He promised the Apostles and their suc- 
cessors His ever-abiding presence : " I am with 
you all days till the consummation of the 



THE CHUECH OF CHEIST. 137 

world." (Matt, xxviii. 20.) That consiunma- 
tion is not yet come ; Christ, therefore, is still 
with His Church as He was with His Apostles. 
With them and through them He Himself 
teaches ; with them and through them He 
Himself baptizes and administers the other 
sacraments as means of salvation ; with them 
and through them He governs His Church, He 
identifies their authority with his own : " He 
that heareth you heareth Me, and he that 
despiseth you despiseth Me." (Luke, x. 16.) 
He places those who are rebellious to His 
Church on the same footing with the heathen 
and the publican, who, as such, have no share 
in the kingdom of God. He that " will not hear 
the Church, let him be to thee as the heathen 
and the publican." (Matt, xviii. 17.) He makes 
faith in their preaching, and in the baptism ad- 
ministered by them, conditions wdthout which 
none can be saved; "Go ye into the whole 
world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. 
He that believeth and is baptized, shall be 
saved, but he that believeth not, shall be con- 
demned." (Mark, xvi. 16.) The Apostles act 
on these principles. St. J ohn tells the world : 
" He that knoweth God, heareth us, he that is 
not of God, heareth us not ;" and he gives it as 
a characteristic sign of truth and error : " By 
12^ 



138 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



tills we know the Spirit of trutli, and the spirit 
of error." (1 John, iv. 6.) 

NoWy how can you reconcile all this with a 
fallible Church ? If the Church could err, then 
the error would redound on Jesus Christ Him- 
self. For, on the one hand, He makes the 
Apostles and their successors, or in other words, 
the teaching Church, His organ ; He identifies 
Himself with her; — and, on the other. He 
binds all creatures to subject themselves to that 
Church, as a condition without which they re- 
main in error, without which they are sure to 
be condemned ; and yet, He w^ould not have 
made that Church infallible, in proposing to 
them the doctrinal and practical means of sal- 
vation. Would not, in that case, the errors 
into which men might and would naturally 
fall, redound on Him, who had given such a 
power and such a commandment ? He would, 
on the hypothesis that she can deceive and 
mislead men, command them to obey her undei 
pain of damnation, whether she teaches error 
or truth, which is an absurdity. 

He promises to work signs and wonders 
through His Church, that the people may be- 
lieve the doctrines which she proposes, and she 
has eujoyed, till this day, the privilege of con- 
firming the doctrines which she proposes, by 



THE CHUECH OF CHRIST. 



139 



unmistakable and nndonbted miracles. How 
could He allow this unless He really approved 
the doctrines of the Church, in behalf of which 
these miracles are wrought ? 

Finally, if there is no infallible Church, then 
there is no rule of faith at all ; therefore, no 
faith in Christ ; therefore, no salvation. For, 
according to our separated brethren, the only 
rules of faith apart from the infallible author- 
ity of the Church, are the private spirit, and 
private reason of each individual. But, as we 
have proved in our preceding lecture, neither 
of these can impart to any one the infallible 
certainty that he has the faith, as it is in Christ 
Jesus ; therefore, no one can be infallibly cer- 
tain that he has the true faith. It is not enough 
to imagine, to think, to hope, that what any- 
one believes, is the doctrine of Christ'; for, 

faith is the substance of things hoped for, the 
conviction of things that appear not." (Heb. 
xi. 1.) "Whoever has not such evidence must 
necessarily doubt ; and he that doubts cannot 
believe. Faith and doubt exclude each other. 
Nor, will it do to say, that every one becomes 
infallible by the aid of the Spirit, or by read- 
ing the Bible. For, this assmnption no Prot- 
estant Church has ever set up a-s a claim to its 
own infallible orthodoxy. And rightly so ; for 



140 



THE CHUECH OF CHRIST. 



then, since the assistance of the Divine Spirit 
is promised to all, all mnsfc needs be infallible. 
Then, we are as infallible as onr separated 
brethren. Then, the Socinian, reading the 
Bible, is as infallible as the Episcopalian, the 
Jew as infallible as the Presbyterian, and 
so on. 

Neither will it do to say, " But the Bible 
which I read, and the Spirit, who testifies to 
my inmost conscience, what is the inmost faith 
in Jesus, are infallible." We do not deny the 
infaUibility of either ; bnt we maintain, that 
yon and the Bible are two difierent things; 
that you and the Spirit are two different per- 
sons. To prove your infallibility by the fact 
that the Bible and the Spirit are infallible, you 
must first prove that your understanding be- 
comes infallible by the mere fact, that you read 
the Bible and that the Spirit assists you in 
reading it. The objective truths of the Bible 
become subjective in the mind of the reader. 
It is your subjective understanding of the truth 
which is the recipient of the objective truth, as 
proposed in the Bible, or by the Spirit. How 
do you prove that your subjective understand- 
ing seizes with infallible certainty, the object- 
ive truth proposed by the Spirit or the Bible ? 
Until you prove this, you prove nothing. A 



THE CHUECH OF CHEIST. 



14:1 



fallible recipient faculty cannot exceed its own 
powers, which are essentially fallible, till it re- 
ceive an assistance which is infallible, and en- 
dows it with infallible power. If yon answer, 
the fault is with the reader, not with the Bible 
nor the Spirit, the same question returns : But, 
how do you infallibly determine which of the 
two is in fault, you or we ? If you say, this is 
to be settled by the Scriptures, you beg the 
question. For, suppose we do not understand 
texts which tell us how to avoid misunderstand- 
ing the Bible and the Spirit, as you do, who, 
or what, in the last resort, is to decide between 
us ? ISTo longer the Bible ; for the difficulty 
is precisely about the meaning of the Bible on 
that score. 'Nov the Spirit ; for the Spirit wit- 
nesseth two contradictory things on the same 
subject. Nor, in fine, private reason, for your 
private reason contradicts ours, and vice versa, 
ours contradicts yours. The only reasonable 
theory, therefore, is, that Christ has established 
a supreme tribunal apart from the Bible, com- 
posed of living men, to whom He promised the 
Spirit of Truth, so that it would never, yea, 
could never misunderstand the doctrines of 
faith and morals propounded for the belief and 
practice of the faithful. When He began to 
preach His Gospel, He Himself, was at once 



THE CHTJBCH OF CHRIST. 



the infallible witness of all tlie traths He 
taiiglit, the infallible Judge of the meaning of 
His own Word, and its infallible Teacher and 
Expounder. The same method He continued, 
by appointing His Apostles and their succes- 
sors, the infallible witnesses, judges, and ex- 
pounders of all things whatsoever He had 
taught them; obliging the hearers to hear 
them, as if He Himself were judging and 
teaching ; obliging them, under the threatened 
penalty of eternal damnation if they refuse, to 
believe their word, or His own, and making 
their obedience or disobedience the distinctive 
marks of the spirit of truth and the spirit of 
error. For that purpose. He promised His 
Apostles and their successors. His own presence 
and assistance, and that of the Holy Spirit. 
" Behold ! I am with you all days, even to the 
consummation of the world." (Matt, xxviii. 20.) 
" And I will ask the Father, and He shall give 
you another Paraclete, that He may abide with 
you for ever, the Spirit of truth, whom the 
world cannot receive, because it seeth Him 
not, nor knoweth Him; but you shall know 
Him, because He shall abide with you, and 
shall be in you. He will teach you all things, 
and bring all things to your mind, whatsoever 
He shall have said to you." (John, xiv. 16, 



THE CHUECH OF CHRIST. 143 



17 J 26.) And that Spirit is the Spirit of J esus. 
"He shall not speak of Himself, bnt what 
things soever He shall hear. He shall speak." 
(Ibid. xvi. 13.) 

That spirit was to accompany them always 
and everywhere, so that, when interrogated at 
the bar of hnman justice, for the faith that 
was in them, " it is not you that speak," says 
Christ, " but the spirit of your Father speaketh 
in you." (Matt. x. 20.) It is thus that Christ 
loves His Church ; it is thus that He sanctifies 
it, in order " that He might present it to Him- 
self a glorious Church, not having spot or wrin- 
kle or any such thing, but that it should be 
holy and without blemish." (Eph. v. 26, 27.) 

"Whatever we have hitherto said concerning 
the necessity and the fact of the existence of an 
infallible Church, may be confirmed by a com- 
parison. The Church is the society of believers 
in the doctrine of Christ. As a society, it is 
made up of many individuals. It is a corpora- 
tion, a body composed of many members. 
Every society must necessarily have a head, 
that head must have authority. A society in 
which all are sovereign, is no society at all. 
To meet as a collective individual, there must 
be a point of contact somewhere. Individual 
sovereignty is individual independence, and 



14:4: THE CHUR€H OF CHRIST. 

excludes the possibility of contact witli the 
rest of individuals. There must be laws. No 
gociety can exist without laws ; these laws must 
be observed ; to have them observed, there 
must be an authority which can interpret the 
meaning of the laws, and enforce their observ- 
ance. A law whose meaning cannot be set- 
tled, is no law at all ; for law binds as some- 
thing defined, something positive. If the 
meaning cannot be agreed upon, the positive- 
ness of the law disappears, consequently its 
binding obligation. There must, therefore, be 
a tribunal, a court of final appeal in every 
society, to determine the real meaning of the 
law. To this court must be referred all doubts, 
all disputes concerning the law, and it must be 
able to settle them. Otherwise, the meaning 
of the law remaining in doubt, the law itself 
will be doubtful, and doubtful laws can never 
impose positive obligations. Hence the max- 
im : lex dubia non obligate a doubtful law is 
not binding. To meet this difficulty, every 
well-constituted society has established a judi- 
ciary, or court, whose decisions, in disputed 
cases of the law, are, by the common consent 
of the individual members, and from the very 
necessity of the case, considered final ; and it 
is, therefore, called the Supreme Court. To 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 145 

this court tlie members of society implicitly 
ascribe an infallible authority of its own; 
namely, a judicial infallibility ; that is to say, 
though the Supreme Court may and does some- 
times actually err in its decisions, yet as the 
last and highest authority in such cases, its 
decisions cannot be repealed by the authority 
of the individual nor by another court. If this 
is deemed essential to the well-being of human 
societies, how much more so to the well-being 
and existence of a divine society among men ? 
And just in proportion as the one is more im- 
portant than the other, must the divine society 
have a means more secure than the other. The 
divine society should, therefore, have a divine 
means to secure her own well-being and exist- 
ence. If so, then, instead of a meice judicially 
infallible, she must have an actually infallible 
authority, to decide questions of the divine law. 
That is to say, her final decision must not only 
be ultimate to the litigant, because there is no 
higher court of appeal for him, but because her 
decision is indeed, in reality, the only possible 
decision in the case, so that the voice of that 
tribunal is always, and in every instance, the 
voice of truth itself. Without such a tribunal 
the litigant would always retain the right, 

and, indeed, would be under the obligation of 
13 



146 



THE CHUKCH OF CHRIST. 



doubting the trutli of the decision. As this 
decision would, on our hypothesis, be a deci- 
sion in matters of faith or morals, the faith of 
the litigant would remain a doubtful one, and 
hence no faith at all. Christ, therefore, would 
not have sufficiently provided for His society, 
if He had not established an actually infallible 
authority, an actually infallible Church. 

A church constituted as we have hitherto 
proved her to be, must needs be indefectible 
and perpetual. She must, in this respect, too, 
resemble her founder and her keeper. Christ 
founded His Church on the day of Pentecost, 
when He sent down His Spirit upon His Apos- 
tles in the form of fiery tongues. He had 
Himself risen from the grave, and having died 
once, dieth now no more. His kingdom and 
His throne are for ever and ever. All other 
things were to perish, but He was to continue 
the self-same, and His word was not to pass 
away. If His Church was destined to be the 
representative of His own mission, then she, like 
Him, must continue to exist forever. She must 
be indestructible in her essence, and perpetual 
in her duration. That is to say, the Chin^ch 
of Christ must continue to possess the same 
internal and external constitution, properties, 
and marks, with which she was founded in the 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



147 



beginning. In one sense, the Indefectibility 
characteristic of the Church is the same as her 
Unity, but, considered in connection with dura- 
tion, a thing may be one, without being inde- 
fectible or perpetual. Hence when that one- 
ness is considered as indefectible and perpetual, 
it constitutes a new property, a new character- 
istic of that thing. Christ came to save all 
men; for that purpose He instituted His 
Qhurch as His representative. His organ, by 
which all should be able to come to the knowl- 
edge of the truth. 

Now, if the Church could ever fail, it would 
follow that the end of His mission could fail. 
The moment you suppose the means to fail, 
that very moment the end fails. If you sup- 
pose the Church could fail at any period of 
time, it would be because her constitution, her 
essential properties, her characteristic marks 
would fail : if they or any one of them fail, she 
is no longer cognizable ; for it is by these that 
she is cognizable as the Church of Christ. It 
she ceases to be cognizable, she ceases to be a 
means of salvation ; and since she is the rep- 
resentative of Christ's mission, the mission of 
Christ fails with her. The fact is, her essen- 
tial constituents or properties are so insep- 
arably interwoven with each other, that if 



148 



THE CHUUCH OF CKRIST. 



yon take out a single one, you destroy the 
whole Churcli. For instance, suppose her cle- 
fectible ; the moment she fails, she ceases to be 
Apostolical, for that moment she breaks away 
from the chain that binds her to the Apostles. 
Ton destroy her Unity, because she teaches no 
longer the same doctrine. Ton take away her 
Catholicity, which makes her existence univer- 
sal as to the sum total of the doctrines taught, 
and as to the time in which, and the people 
among whom they are taught. Ton take away 
her Sanctity ; for she ceases to be the medium 
by which sanctification is to be effected. Ton 
destroy her Infallibility, because she fails in 
teaching and believing the doctrines as they 
were laid down by her Founder. Finally, you 
make her invisible ; for she would no longer be 
cognizable as the true Church of Christ. The 
Church, therefore, as the representative of 
Christ's mission to men, must be indefectible 
and perpetual. 

To suppose her defectible, is not only to 
open the way to all heresy and schism, but to 
sanction them. If she can cease to exist in her 
primary and essential constituents, she can fail at 
any time, at any period. All that heretics will 
require to justify their separation from her, is 
to proclaim the fact th^t she has actually failed. 



m 

THE CHUECH OF CHEIST. 149 

Moreover, if tlie Churcli ceases to be the 
medium througli which Christ effects the sanc- 
tification and salvation of mankind. He mnst 
have provided another means in her stead. He 
must have pointed out that means as distinctly 
as he pointed out His Church. Has He done 
so ? Has He foretold that when His mission 
failed. He would raise up another man to make 
a new covenant with His people? Where is 
that promise? Who was that man to be? 
Did He point out any of the heretics of the 
first ages of Christianity? Did He accredit 
Luther or Calvin as His successors in the fulfil- 
ment of His Divine yet defectible mission? 
Did He help them to establish it as He did 
His o^vn ? Did He assist Luther, Calvin, or 
any others, as He did the Apostles, as He 
promised all those would be assisted who truly 
believe in Him ? Did Luther, Calvin, or any 
heresiarchs prove the Divinity of their mission 
by miracles, by signs and wonders, by prophe- 
cies made in confirmation of their doctrines? 
Yet this would be necessary; for, otherwise, 
the world would have no sufficient evidence to 
conclude that the old form of things had 
passed away, and that a new one was to suc- 
ceed in its place. 

It will not do to answer, that the purity oi 
13* 



150 THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 

their doctrine, in opposition to tlie corrnption 
whicli had crept into the Church, was sufficient 
evidence of the Divinity of their mission. For 
that is precisely the thing in question. The 
question among so many different and contra- 
dictory creeds, is, precisely, which constitutes 
the only true, the only divine creed. Doc- 
trines cannot be assumed as the first and only 
evidence of the truth and divinity of the 
Church which proclaims them. 

The proofs of the indefectibility of the 
Church, both in the Old and New Testaments, 
are plain and numerous. We read in Daniel : 
" And in the days of those kingdoms the God 
of Heaven will set up a kingdom that shall 
never be destroyed : and his kingdom shall not 
be left delivered up to another people, and it 
shall break in pieces, and shall consume all 
these kingdoms ; and itself shall stand for ever." 
(Dan. ii. 44.) This kingdom is, according to 
the interpreters of the passage, no other than 
the spiritual kingdom of Christ, the same of 
which it is said, " Of His kingdom there shall 
be no end the same of which the Archangel 
Gabriel said to Mary, "The Lord shall give 
unto Him the throne of David His Father, 
and He shall reign in the house of Jacob for 
ever." (Luke, i. 32, 33. See, also, Dan vii. 



THE CHUECH OF CHEIST. 151 



14 ; Isaiah, ix. 7 ; lix. 20, 21 ; EzeMel, xxxyii 
24, etc.) In the text aheady often quoted from 
Matthew (xxYiii. 20), our Divine Saviour prom- 
ises His Apostles that He will be with them 
even till the consummation of the world. It 
is evident, from the text, that He promises 
them His divine assistance, His divine though 
invisible presence in those things which are 
necessarily infallible to carry out the object of 
His mission, till the end of time. Hence He 
promises to be with them in teaching, in bap- 
tizmg, that is to say, in administering the 
sacraments, until the consummation of the 
world. He thus consoles them for the loss 
which they should sustain by His bodily ab- 
sence, and strengthens their conviction, that, 
though far away in body. His invisible Spirit 
will always be with them, teaching and minis- 
tering with them always, or as the Greek ex- 
presses it, all the days, even till the end of 
time. But the Apostles could not live for 
ever. They were mortal, and, like their Mas- 
ter, they were to disappear from earth. Yet, 
like Him, in another sense, they were to re- 
main until the consummation of the world 
How could this be, save by a moral presence 
with their successors, so that they, in their 
turn, appointing representatives of the mission 



152 THE CHUECH OF CHEIST. 



of Glirist on earth, should morally continue to 
live with them, in the oneness of faith, sacra- 
ments, and government, and thus preserve the 
interior and exterior properties and essential 
marks of the Chm*ch. In other words, Christ 
promises to remain with His Church, so that 
He will provide for her always, as He would 
do if He were still visibly present on earth ; 
that, as invisible Head, He would continue to 
do for her what He would have done had He 
remained her visible Head during all the 
stages of her existence. Were He Himself to 
remain Her visible Head on earth. He would 
certainly never allow her to fail ; therefore, she 
is yet what she always was, and she shall be 
the selfsame for ever. 

He made a similar promise to Peter, when 
He appointed him the head of His Church. 
" Thou art Peter" (a rock), " and upon this rock 
I will build My Church, and the gates of hell 
shall not prevail against it." (Matt. xvi. 18.) 
The gates of hell would prevail against the 
Chm^ch the very moment that she would be- 
come other than she was when founded. An 
institution, a particular form of government, 
ceases to be, as soon as its first institution — its 
essential characteristics — cease to exist. So it 
is with the Church. The moment her consti- 



THE CHUECH OF CHRIST. 



153 



tution — her essential properties — as originally 
given her, cease to exist, that very moment she 
ceases to be the Chnrch of Christ. Hence it 
follows, that a radical reformation is impossible 
in snch an institution. Abuses which are ex- 
ternal to the primitive constitution — to the 
formal nature of the institution — may be, and 
should be, corrected ; but you cannot change 
the formal constitution, without changing the 
institution itself. This change the God-man 
designed to be beyond the power of man, yea, 
even of hell. 

If the true Church of Christ is indefectible 
and perpetual, she is necessarily Apostolical. 
For then she remained formally the selfsame 
throughout the ages. That the Church of 
Christ is Apostolical in her origin is a fact of 
history, which no one, in his sound senses, 
dare deny. To His Apostles He gave the 
commission to preach the Gospel to every crea- 
ture. To them He intrusted the ministry of 
Sacraments. To them He left the governing 
power. Hence St. Paul tells the Ephesians: 
"Now, therefore, you are no more strangers 
and foreigners, but you are fellow-citizens with 
the Saints, and the domestics of God, built upon 
the foundation of the Apostles and prophets, 
Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner 



154 



THE CnrRCH OF CHKIST. 



stone; in wlioni all the bnilding framed to- 
gether groweth into a holy temple in the Lord : 
in whom you also are built together into a 
habitation of God in the spirit." (Eph. iv. 
19-22.) No Church, therefore, can claim to 
be the Church of Christ, which does not pro 
ceed either immediately or mediately from the 
Apostles, and therefore from Christ. All those 
Churches which have another than an Apostle 
for founder, are by that very fact strangers and 
foreigners to Christ and His Church. They 
lack what TertuUian calls tlie " consanguinity 
of faith they are not of the " household of 
the faith;" they enter not like living stones 
into the "spiritual house." (1 Peter, ii. 5.) 
A chm^ch is immediately Apostolical, when it 
is founded by one of the Apostles. Such were 
the Churches of Corinth, Ephesus, Eome, and 
others. It is mediately Apostolical, when 
founded by any one appointed by one of the 
Apostles. Thus the Church of Alexandiia was 
founded by St. Mark, appointed and empow- 
ered for that purpose by the Apostles. Or 
when a church founded by an Apostle pro- 
duces through her Apostolic missionaries an- 
other church, as the Apostolic Church of Rome 
founded the churches in Africa and most of the 
Western churches. 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



155 



But it is, moreover, necessary that all these 
Churches remain united with the centre. This 
centre was Peter, whom Christ made the Head 
of the Apostles. Hence there can be no Apos- 
tolic Church which is not in union with the 
Church of Peter. This was the doctrine of all 
ages. Thus St. Irenseus writes: "They who 
would behold truth, may see in every Church 
the Apostolic Faith manifested to the whole 
world ; and .we can enumerate those bishops 
who were appointed by the Apostles and their 
successors down to ourselves; none of whom 
taught, or even knew, the wild opinions of these 
[heretics]. Had the Apostles really professed any 
doctrines which the perfect only were to hear, 
surely they would have communicated them to 
those to whom they intrusted their churches. 
However, as it would be tedious to enumerate 
the whole list of successions, I shall confine 
myself to that of Eome, the greatest, most an- 
cient, and most illustrious Church founded by 
the glorious Peter and Paul; receiving from 
them her doctrine, which was announced to all 
men, and which, through the succession of her 
bishops, is come down to us. Thus we con- 
found all those who, through evil designs, or 
vain-glory, or perverseness, teach what they 
ought not. For to this Church, on accovmi of 



156 



THE CHUECH OF CHEIST. 



its swperior headship^ every other must have 
recourse, tliat is, the faithful of all countries ; 
in which Church has been preserved the doc- 
trine delivered by the Apostles." He then 
enumerates the Popes who had succeeded Pe- 
ter till his day, in the See of Eome : " Linus 
Anacletus, Clement, Evaristus, Alexander, Six 
tuSjTelesphorus, Hyginus, Pius, Anicetus, Soter, 
and Eleutherius, the twelfth from the Apostles, 
who now governs the Church." He then con- 
tinues : " Things being thus made plain, it is 
not from others that truth is to be sought, 
which may be readily learned from the Church. 
For to this Church, as into a rich depository, 
the Apostles committed whatever is of divine 
truth; that each one, if so inclined, might 
thence draw the drink of life. This is the way 
to life ; all other teachers must be shunned as 
thieves and robbers. If there be any dispute 
on a point of minor importance, must we not 
have recourse to the most ancient churches, 
where the Apostles resided, and from them 
collect the truth? And had these Apostles 
left us nothing in writing, must not we then 
have followed that rule of doctrine which they 
delivered to those to whom they intrusted 
their churches ? To this rule many barbarous 
nations submit, who, deprived of the aid of let- 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



157 



ters, ha^e the words of salvation written on 
their hearts, and carefully gnard the doctrine 
which has been delivered." (Adv. User. 1. c. 
3, 4.) 

Tertnllian holds the same language concern- 
ing the Apostolic Churches. "We are not 
allowed," says he, " to indulge our own humor, 
nor to choose what another has invented. We 
have the Apostles of our Lord for founders, 
who were not themselves the invenf.ors nor 
authors of what they have left us; but they 
have faithfully taught the world the doctrine 
which they received from Christ. Therefore, 
if an angel from Heaven should preach another 
Gospel, we would say anathema to him." (De 
Prcescript. c. vi., vii., viii.) 

The Apostolicity of faith follows, therefore, 
from the fact of the Apostolical origin of the 
Church. And justly so ; for the faith of the 
Church cannot at any given period be other 
than the faith of Christ ; but the faith of Christ 
was the faith of the Apostles ; thejefore, the 
faith of the Church must always be Apostolical. 
Christ, surely, wished His faith to be for ever 
the self-same. Since, then. He gave His faith 
ill all its fulness to the Apostles, the Apostoli- 
cal faith alone can be identified with the faith 
of Christ. On the supposition that there could 
u 



158 



THE CHTJECH OF CHEIST. 



be a Church not founded by the Apostles, and 
not receiving the faith of Christ as delivered 
to the Apostles, there would be a Chui'ch of 
Christ which does not profess the same faith 
as that of the Apostles and of Christ. To 
loiow what that Apostolic faith really is, it is 
not necessary to compare doctrine with doc- 
trine ; it sufSces to ascertain what Church is in 
uninterrupted communion with the Apostles 
till this day. The Fathers and Doctors of 
the Church insist upon this fact, as conclusive 
evidence of the falsehood of the doctrines of all 
other Churches not in uninterrupted com- 
munion with the Church of the Apostles. 

Thus, besides the passages already quoted, 
Tertullian says : " What will you gain by re- 
curring to Scripture, when one denies what the 
other asserts ? Learn rather who it is that 
possesses the faith of Christ ; to whom the 
Scriptures belong ; from whom, by whom, and 
when that faith was delivered by which we are 
made Christians. For, where shall be found 
the true faith, there will be the genuine Scrip- 
tures; there the true interpretations of them ; 
and there all Christian traditions. Christ 
chose His Apostles, whom He sent to preach 
to all nations. They delivered His doctrine, 
and founded Churches, from which Churches, 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



159 



others drew the seeds of the same doctrines, as 
new ones continue daily to do. Thus these, as 
the offspring of the Apostolic Churches, are 
themselves deemed Apostolical. Now, to 
know what the Apostles taught, that is, what 
Christ revealed to them, recourse must be had 
to the Churches which they founded, and which 
they instructed by word of mouth, and by their 
epistles. For it is plain that all doctrine 
which is conformable to the faith of these 
Mother-Churches, is true ; being that which 
they received from the Apostles, the Apostles 
from Christ, Christ from God ; and all other 
opinions must be novel and false." (Ibid., c. 
xvii., xix., XX., xxi.) 

From all we have hitherto said, it follows 
that the first Church is still the true Church, 
and that all the Churches posterior to the 
Church of the Apostles are proved false by the 
mere fact that they were not founded by them. 
This truth Tertullian presses with his usual 
clearness and strength of argument : " It is a 
maxim not to be controverted, that what was 
first delivered is evangelical and true, and what 
was afterwards imported is extraneous and 
false. By this rule all future heresies may be 
tried. But should they dare to arrogate to 
themselves the name of Apostolic, because at 



160 



THE CHUECH OF CHRIST. 



that time they may have been in existence, let 
them produce the origins of their churches, the 
regular succession of their bishops; and so 
show that the first in that order was an Apostle, 
or, at least, constantly united with the Apos- 
tles. For, in this manner the Apostolic 
Churches deduce the order of their successions. 
Smyrna has her Polycarp, appointed by St. 
John; Eome, her Clement, ordained by St. 
Peter ; and so the other churches. Let the 
heretics show this. And should they invent 
something like it, they have gained nothing ; 
Bince their doctrine, compared with that of the 
Apostles, by its diversity and contrariety, will 
show that it came not from any Apostle, or 
X Apostolic man. For as the Apostles would not 
have taught discordant doctrines, so neither 
would their immediate followers have taught 
differently from them." (Ibid., c. xxxi., ximi.) 

Besides the faith, the sacraments, and the 
legitimate government of the Church can come 
only from the Apostles. Here the same reason- 
ing applies. To the Apostles Christ intrusted 
the ministry of the sacraments, and the gov- 
ernment of His Church. These were to be con- 
tinued through their successors. No churches, 
therefore, can claim these as their own, unless 
they can prove that they have received them 



\ 



THE CHUECH OF CHKIST. 161 

in regular succession fi'om ono of the Apostles ; 
and that they received them as they were de^ 
livered to them, namely, nnited to the central 
authority of St. Peter. To do this, they must 
prove that every bishop, or head of their 
Churches, can trace up his appointment to an 
Apostle or his successor, and that the appoint- 
ment was approved of by the central power. 

From the Apostolicity of the Church we 
pass to her Catholicity, which is another of her 
essential marks. The Catholicity of the Church 
has a twofold aspect. One regards her iden- 
tity of faith, sacraments, and government, 
throughout all ages, and among all peoples, or 
her internal and external organization, with 
regard to all times and places ; and the other, 
her diffusion throughout all times, places, and 
among all nations. On this subject Vincent 
of Lerins remarks: "But, in this Catholic 
Church we must be particularly careful to hold 
fast that doctrine which has been believed in 
all places, at all times, and hy all. For, as the 
word itself plainly denotes, there is nothing 
truly and properly Catholic but that which 
comprehends all in general. Now, it will be 
so, if we follow universality, antiquity, and 
unanimous consent. We shall follow univer- 
salitAj^ if we believe that doctrine alone to be 

14* 



162 



THE CHIJRCH OF CHRIST. 



true, which the Church everywhere admits. 
We shall follow antiquity^ if we depart not 
from the opinions which our ancestors and 
fathers openly maintained. "We shall follow 
unanimous consent^ if we adhere to the senti- 
ments of all, or of almost all, the priests and 
teachers." (Common, i., n. 2.) 

The general diffusion of the Church must be 
understood in a moral, or relative, not in an ab- 
solute sense. For it is evident, that the Church 
could not be strictly Catholic at the very com- 
mencement of her existence. She had within 
her the seeds of growth, which were to be scat- 
tered, and to germinate gradually and succes- 
sively all over the world. It does not mean, 
that the whole world should be actually Cath- 
olic, nor that her faith should be practically 
embraced by every individual of the nations of 
the earth. But her doctrines were to reach 
successively every empire and kingdom in the 
world ; so that all might, at least, hear of 
them, and that it would be easy, if they wished, 
to become acquainted with them. Nor is 
Catholicity destroyed by the defection of any 
kingdom or nation from the doctrines of the 
Church. First, because in their case, the com- 
mand of the Saviour has been fulfilled : " Go 
and preach the Gospel to every creature ; go 



THE CHUECH OF CHEIST. 



163 



teacli all nations." (Matt, xxviii. 19.) Sec- 
ondly, because these defections have been fore- 
told, and therefore enter into the plan of the 
divine economy of Christ with regard to His 
Church. Thus we read : " For it must needs 
be that scandals come" (Matt, xviii. Y) ; and, 
" there must be also heresies, that they, also, 
who are approved, may be made manifest 
among you" (1 Cor. xi. 19) ; and again : " For 
there shall be a time when they will not bear 
sound doctrine; but according to their own 
desires, they will heap to themselves teachers, 
having itching ears, and will turn away indeed 
their hearing from the truth, but will be 
turned unto fables." (2 Tim. iv. 3, 4.) Our 
Divine Saviour Himself foretold, that, at the 
end of time, the faith of a large number will 
have failed ; for. He says : " There shall arise 
false Christs, and false prophets, and they shall 
show great signs and wonders, in so much as 
to deceive (if it were possible) even the elect" 
(Matt. xxiv. 24), and " they shall seduce many ;" 
so many, that He adds : " But yet, when the Son 
of man cometh, shall He find, think you, faith 
on earth ?" (Luke, xviii. 8.) So, in like man- 
ner, we are told, that the Apostles and their 
successors in the ministry, will be rejected by 
many, banished, or otherwise persecuted by 



164 



THE CHUECH of CHRIST. 



others. Yet, tliis miicli must be asserted, that 
the Church of Christ shall always be more 
widely diffused, and better known by a larger 
majority of mankind than any heretical oi 
schismatical Church in the world, or she will 
be, at least, distinguishable from all other 
Churches by the mutual agreement of all her 
members in the same doctrines, and their union 
with the whole Church, so that she will evi- 
dently be the religion of all times and peoples. 
This much was promised her by the voice of 
God's prophets in the old, and by Christ's 
own lips in the new dispensation. The Church 
is Christ's inheritance, and it is to comprise all 
the nations : " Ask of Me, and I will give thee 
the Gentiles for thy inheritance, and the ut- 
most parts of the earth for Thy possessions." 
(Ps. ii. 8.) 

It is His kingdom, which is universal. " He 
shall rule from sea to sea, and from the river 
unto the ends of the earth. Before Him the 
Ethiopians shall fall down and His enemies 
shall lick the ground. The kings of Tharsis 
and the islands shall offer presents ; the kings 
of the Arabians and of Saba shall bring gifts. 
And all kings of the earth shall adore him : all 
nations shall serve Him." (Ps. Ixxi. 8-11.) 
^^AU the ends of the earth shall remember, 



THE CHURCH OF CHKIST. 



165 



and shall be converted to the Lord. And all 
the kindreds of the Gentiles shall adore in His 
sight." (Ps. xxi. 28.) 

When Christ sent His Apostles and their 
snccessors "to preach the Gospel to every 
creature, — to teach all nations," He certainly 
designed that their preaching should be efl&ca- 
cious ; but it could not be efficacious, unless 
there were some in all nations who should 
obey the Gospel, at least for a time. And if 
they did obey, the Church of Christ was really 
Catholic, since it had believers in every clime 
and nation. This was fulfilled in the days of 
the Apostles, who, according to St. Mark, 
" going forth, preached everywhere." (xvi. 20.) 
This made the Apostle St. Paul write to the 
Komans, that although all did " not obey the 
Gospel," yet the voice of the preachers " went 
over all the earth, and their words unto the 
ends of the whole world" (Rom. x. 16, 18) ; and 
in the eighth verse of the first chapter, he tells 
them 'that their "faith is spoken of in the 
whole world." To the Colossians he writes, 
that the Gospel had come not only unto them, 
but it is also " in the whole world, and bring 
eth forth fruit and groweth, even as it doth in 
you." (i. 6.) The fact is, this Catholicity 
was, to a great extent, established on the very 



166 



THE CHIJECn OF CHEIST. 



day of the foundation of the Church. For we 
are told that the Apostles, being filled with 
the Holy Ghost, began to speak with divers 
tongues to Jews, devout men out of every na- 
tion under Heaven. " Parthians and Modes," 
were there, " and Elamites and the inhabitants 
of Mesopatamia, Judea, and Cappadocia, Pon- 
tus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphilia, Egypt 
and the parts of Lybia about Cyrene, and 
strangers of Rome, Jews also, and Proselytes, 
Cretes, and Arabians." (Acts, ii. 4-11.) 

Catholicity, then, is one of the distinctive 
marks of the Church of Christ. This made St. 
Augustine say: "We must hold fast to the 
Christian religion, and to the communion of 
that church which is Catholic, and is called 
Catholic not only by her own children, but 
even by all her enemies. The heretics and 
followers of schisms, whenever they talk not 
with their own, but with strangers, despite 
themselves, call nothing else Catholic Church, 
but the Catholic. For they cannot be 'under- 
stood unless they call her by the name which 
she bears throughout the world." (Lib. de 
Unit. EccL, cap. vii., n. 12. 

Finally, the true Church of Christ must be 
holy ; holy in her Founder, holy in her doc- 
trine, and that holiness must be manifested in 



THE CHUECH OF CHEIST. 167 



the lives of her members. The Church is the 
body of Christ. She receives continually the 
influence of holiness : He owed it to Himself 
to sanctify that body. 

The object of the Church is to bring all 
nations to the way of truth and salvation ; yea, 

this is the will of God/' says the Apostle, 
"your sanctiflcation " (1. Thess. iv. 3). But 
she cannot make others holy unless she herself 
be intrinsically holy. The true Church must 
always be identified with the Church of the 
Apostles and of Christ, but she would not be 
thus identified, unless she were holy ; for the 
Church founded by Christ and the Apostles, 
was a holy Church. Moreover, Christ loved 
the Church, and delivered himself up to her, 
that He might sanctify her, and " present her 
to Himself a glorious Church, having neither 
spot nor wrinkle, nor any such thing, but 
that it should be holy, and without blemish." 
(Eph. V. 26, 27.) Are His designs to be 
frustrated? Did He pay the price of her 
ransom in vain ? " " He chose us," continues 
the same Apostle, "that we should be holy 
and unspotted in His sight." (Eph. 1. 4.) He 
gave Himself for us, " that He might redeem 
us from all iniquity, and purify unto Himself 
a people acceptable, pursuing good works.'* 



I 



168 



THE CHURCH OF CHEIST. 



(Titns, ii. 14.) The object of Cliristj in trans- 
ferring His mission to the Apostles and their 
snccessors, was that they should go and should 
bring forth fruit, and that their frnit should 
remain. This fruit was the sanctification oi 
believers, by the preaching of the word, the 
ministration of the Sacraments, the practice oi 
every Christian virtue. The mission being 
perpetual, the same fruit must attend the 
labors of the ministry now as in the days of 
the Apostles, and, as the means of sanctifi- 
cation were accompanied with signs and 
wonders, so now, there must exist in the true 
Church, miracles, which shall testify to the 
truth and the sanctity of the doctrines, and the 
means of salvation proposed to the believer. 
Hence the true Church must continue to work 
miracles, especially among unbelievers. 

Moreover, it is necessary that in a holy 
Church, there should always be saintly children. 
Otherwise, the means of holiness would be 
useless. In every age and in every country, 
therefore, there must be found men and women 
in the true Church of Christ, whose exterior 
sanctity is a visible proof of the interior holi- 
ness of the Church of which they are members. 
This does not mean that every individual 
member of the Church must actually be a saint. 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



169 



For altliougli the Churcli continnes to possess 
intrinsically all the means necessary to sanctify 
each one of her members, although her minis- 
ters never cease to exhoii; them to pursue the 
way of justice, yet it will always remain true, 
that in the Church there will he chaff as well 
as wheat, and that her net will contain bad as 
well as good fishes. For her Founder has per- 
mitted that the tares should grow together 
with the wheat until the great harvest-day, 
when He will say to the reapers : " Gather up 
first the cockle, and bind it into bundles to 
burn ; but gather the wheat into My barn . . . 
The Son of man shall send His angels, and 
they shall gather out of His kingdom all 
scandals, and them that work iniquity; and 
shall cast them into the furnace of fire ; there 
shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. Then 
shall the just shine as the sun in the kingdom 
of their Father." (Matt. xiii. 30, 41, 42, 43.) 

Having seen which are the essential proper- 
ties and characteristic marks of the true Church, 
we are to prove, in our next lecture, that they 
belong to one only existing Church, and that 
that Church is the Eoman Catholic. 
15 



IV. 



THE ROMAi^ CATHOLIC CHUECH 
THE CHUECH OF CHEIST. 

" Thou art Peter ; and upon this rock I will build my 
Churcli, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." 
Matt. xvi. 18. 

To prove tliat Christ established a church, 
we had recourse to history. The same facts 
which prove that Christ established a church, 
prove that that church is no other than the 
Church of Eome. The Apologists who de- 
fended Christianity against the calumnies of 
the infideb; the Fathers who vindicated its 
doctrines against heretics and schismatics ; the 
Confessors who were banished from home and 
country; the Martyrs who sealed their faith 
with the last drop of their blood during the 
first three centuries of the Christian era, were 
members of the; Romo^) Catholic Church, de- 
fended, vindicated her doctrines, her sacra- 
ments, her government, suffered and died for 
her. The bishops, the priests, the missionaries, 
who preached the Gospel to every creature, 
who went forth to teach and baptize all na- 



THE CHURCH OF CHEIST. 171 



tions, went forth from her, as from the only 
house in which Christ dwelled, as from the 
only fold of the one true shepherd. Her tem- 
ples and her altars, her sculptures '^nd her 
jm^es, everywhere testified to her doctrines^ 
her rites, her worship. Her pontiffs have suc- 
ceeded each other in uninterrupted succession 
from St. Peter down to Pius IX. \ She, in all 
ages, as in our own, was pointed out even by 
her enemies, as the only Catholic Church in 
the world. She alone can trace back her ex- 
istence to the days of the Apostles, whence her 
enemies are agreed in calling her the Old 
Church. She alone has preserved her doc- 
trines, her sacraments, her government, un- 
changed throughout the course of nineteen 
centuries ; she alone has withstood the violence 
of earth, and proved herself built upon a rock, 
against which the gates of hell could never 
prevail. She alone has been a mother ever 
fruitful in saintly children, whose sanctity was 
approved by Heaven in many wonders. Now, 
whatever church unites in herself the above 
enumerated properties and marks, is the 
Church of Christ. The Eoman Catholic 
Church, therefore, is the Church of Christ. 

The true Church of Christ is a society of be- 
lievers, who are united by the profession of one 



172 THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHUECH, 

and tlie same faith, by participation of the 
same sacraments, under the government of 
lawful Pastors, and especially of the Pope of 
'Rome. 

This definition contains the idea which the 
Scriptures and Tradition give us of the true 
Church of Christ. 

As we have seen in our preceding lecture, 
the Church of Christ is a real society, organ- 
ized by her Founder according to the essentia! 
principles of all societies. This society has 
rulers and subjects, superiors and inferiors ; and 
since the object of the society is the attainment 
of the ultimate end of the members, the salva- 
tion of their immortal souls, there are teachers 
and disciples, ministers and those to whom 
they minister. Furthermore, the ruled, the 
taught, and those who are ministered unto, are 
all linked to one supreme head, who has re- 
ceived power and jurisdiction over all, who is 
the source of unity in the faith, communion 
and government, of the Pastors and the flock. 

This body of teachers, pastors, ministers of 
the sacraments, was to exist in uninterrupted 
Buccession, till the end of the world. To this 
body of pastors and teachers Christ promised 
His moral presence. His divine assistance in 
teaching, in administering the aacraments, and 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



173 



in governing His Clmrcli, among all nations, 
till the consummation of the world. And He 
obliged the taught and the rnled to obey those 
pastors, to hear them as if they heard Himself, 
Tinder pain of eternal reprobation. 

Now, this ideal of the Church of Christ is 
realized in the Eoman Catholic Church alone. 
For all other churches lack these essential 
properties of the Church of Christ. They have 
not Christ for their Founder, because every one 
of them sprang up since the foundation of the 
Church by the Saviour. They are not Apos- 
tolical for the same reason. The Apostles 
had already organized the Church of their di- 
vine Master, before these laid the foundation- 
stones of their separate societies. I5y the 
very fact, then, that every sectarian church 
comes necessarily later than the Church of 
Christ and the Apostles, it is proved not to 
be the Church of Christ; therefore not the 
true Church ; therefore not the Church without 
which none can be saved. To the Eoman 
Catholic Church alone belongs the title Apos- 
tolical, because she alone descends from the 
Apostles in uninterrupted succession till the 
present time. Dare any one deny this fact ? 
Show us the sect in the world which can prove 
it was founded by an Apostle. Doubtless it is 



^, 15* 




\ 



174 THE EOMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, 

none of the so called Protestant sects of the 
last three and a half centuries. We know the 
names of their founders, and the date of their 
origin. We know that Campbell, who is still 
living, is the author of the sect that bears his 
name; we know that John "Wesley founded 
the Methodist, George Fox the Quaker Church. . 
Swedenborgians, Mennonites, Calvinists, Lu- 
therans, all bear the names of the respective 
authors of these heresies. Anglicanism was 
not known in England before Henry VIII., ^ 
nor Presbyterianism in Scotland before Knox. 

So it is with all other sects that sprang up 
at various periods of the Christian era. Before 
Peter Waldo there were no Waldenses ; before 
Peter Bruys, no Petro-Bruysians ; before Be- 
rengarius, no Berengarians. Pelagians, Eu- 
tychians, Nestorians, CoUyridians, Donatists, 
Helvidians, Tationists, Novatians, Nicolaites, 
Cerdonians, Valentinians, Carpocratians, Ba- 
silideans, Marcionites, Ebionites, Menandrians, 
Simon-Magians, all derived their origin, as 
well as their doctrines, from the men whose 
names they bore, or still bear, in the annals of 
history. 

It is not sufficient for any of these Churches 
to say : " Oh, we are the true Church of Christ : 
we teach His doctrines ; we observe His ordi- 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



175 



nances ; we govern ourselves according to His 
plan." They should prove these assertions. 
And tliey cannot prove them satisfactorily, save 
by proving that they were founded by one of 
the Apostles ; that they remained faithful and 
obedient to the central authority of -^SL Peter 
and his legitimate successors in the see of 
Rome. 

The moment that you cut off any Church 
from the Apostles — sever it from the rock upon 
which Christ built His Church — that moment 
it ceases to be the Church of Christ. 

The Church of Christ was to be indefectible — 
indestructible. The gates of hell should never 
prevail against her. Hence, there is no possi- 
bility of her becoming corrupted in her faith, 
her sacraments, or her government. If so, 
there can be no reason for any reformation in 
her faith, her sacraments, or her government. 
Every attempt at such a reformation is an ex- 
plicit denialof theindefectibilityof the Church 
of Christ, and consequently, a denial of the 
truth of Christ's promises to His Church. For, 
to assert, that the Church failed, is to assert, 
that Christ did not keep His promise when He 
said " The gates of hell shall not prevail against 
her" (Matt. xvi. 18) ; " I am with you all the 
days, even to the consummation of the world." 



176 THE EOMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, 



(Ibid, xxviii. 20.) But if He did not keep His 
promises, it must have been either because He 
could not do so, or would not ; to assert either 
of which, is to blaspheme Christ. Christ is 
God ; hence nothing is impossible to Him ; 
hence He does not change ; for, Christ is to- 
day, and yesterday, and the same for ever. 
(Heb. xiii. 8.) If His Church was to remain, 
like Himself, for ever the self-same, then we 
reason as follows : whenever, since the days 
of Christ and His Apostles, any man or woman 
established a so-called Christian Church, dif- 
ferent from any other till then existing, the 
Church of Christ either existed or did not. 
If she existed, there could not be any need of 
another ; yea, it was impossible to establish an- 
other Church of Christ; for the Church of 
Christ is essentially one, and therefore, neces- 
sarily excludes a second or a rival Christian 
Church. If the Church of Christ did no 
longer exist at that time, then Christ belied 
His solemn promises to be with His Church 
until the end of the world. Furthermore, the 
only Christian Church existing always, at any 
given period, since the beginning of Christian 
ity, was the Roman Catholic Church ; there- 
fore, she is the onlv true Church of Christ. 
This conclusion is strictly logical. If you find 



THE CHUKCH OF CHKIST. 177 

tlie Eomaa Catholic Clmrcli at every period of 
the Christian era, you find her existing from 
the days of the Apostles. Let ns apply the 
same reasoning to the Churches that sprang up 
since the days of Luther. "When Luther left 
the Eoman Catholic Church, she was either 
the Church of Christ or not. If she was the 
Church of Christ, Luther did wrong to separate 
himself and others from her ; if she was not 
the Church of Christ, then the Church of Christ 
had failed, — to assert which, as we have seen, 
is to blaspheme Christ. For, if the Church of 
Eome was not at that period the Church of 
Christ, where, then, pray, was that Church ? 
Will you say it was the Church of Wickliffe or 
Huss, or the Waldensian or the Albigensian ? 
The same reasoning always returns with the 
same force. When Wicklifie, Huss, Peter 
Waldo, or Simon Magus, separated from the 
Church of Rome, she was then either the true 
Chm'ch of Christ, or she was not ; if she was, 
then all the separatists did wrong, and were 
real heretics, who, according to St. Paul, should 
be avoided as men who are perverted, and 
whom St. John forbids us even to salute. If 
she was no longer the Church of Christ, then 
the Church of Christ had failed ; then Christ's 
promises had failed, and He was an impostor. 



178 THE KOMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, 

Tlie true Clim'cli of Clirist must have a 
body of teachers, and a visible central head, 
who have authority to preach, administer the 
sacraments, govern the Church, and appoint 
their successors, with the same powers which 
were originally given to them. Every pastor 
and head of the true Church must, therefore, 
be able to show the series of pastors and heads 
of the Church, from whom he derives the three- 
fold power of preaching, administering the 
sacraments, and governing the Church of 
Christ. How will any pastor, minister, or head 
of a separate Church, be able to do this ? Let 
Luther, Calvin, Wesley, Cranmer, Knox, Camp- 
bell, point out to us the line of bishops, and 
sovereign pontiffs from whom they derived the 
power of preaching, ministering in, and gov- 
erning the Church. They certainly did not 
receive them from the Roman Catholic Church. 
From what Church, then ? From the Greek 
schismatical Church, perhaps. But the Greek 
schismatical Church is in the same predicament 
as they. She, too, came too late into the 
world, to be the Church of Christ. From 
whom did she receive these powers, in the 
ninth century? ISTot from the Church of 
Eome ; for she separated herself from Eome, 
and incurred her excommunication. Go back 



THE CHUECH OF CHRIST. 179 

as far as you can, and say, from Simon Magus. 
But, from whom did Simon Magus get his 
power ? Not from the Apostles, although he 
lived in their day, for he was condemned by 
the Apostle St. Peter. Therefore, from no one ; 
therefore, these reformers are of the class of 
prophets who run without being sent — to whom 
Christ hath not spoken — of those of whom St. 
John writes : " Verily, verily I say unto you, he 
that entereth not by the door into the sheepfold, 
but climbeth up some other way, the same is a 
thief, and a robber." (John, x. 1.) But those 
who are not sent by Christ nor the Apostles can- 
not preach, a.ccording to the saying of St. Paul : 
" How can they preach unless they be sent ?" 
(Eom. X. 15.) "JSTeither doth any man take the 
honor to himself, but he that is called by God." 
(Heb. V. 4.) And if they have no authority to 
preach, the nations have no obligation to listen 
to them ; if they have no right to dispense the 
sacraments, the people are not bound to receive 
them at their hands ; if they have no delegated 
power to govern, the people cannot be forced 
to obey them. But no sectarian Church can 
tave such an authority or power; therefore, 
the Roman Catholic Church alone has this 
power ; therefore, she alone is to be heard and 
obeyed as the Church of Christ. 



180 THE KOMAN CATHOLIC CHUECH, 

As this subject is of vital importance to 
every individual, inasmnch as our eternal 
salvation depends upon our belonging to tbe 
true Cburcli, let us place this question in 
another light. If the Church of Eome is not 
the Church of Christ, then, we suppose, you 
will say it is the Protestant ? Which of the 
many Protestant Churches ? We have seen in 
the preceding lecture that the Church of 
Christ is essentially one in her faith, sacraments 
and government; we have also seen, in the 
second lecture, that the Protestant Church 
is divided into a hundred and more fragments^ 
each of which pretends to be the Church of 
Christ. Well, then, which of the many Prot- 
estant Churches, think you, is the Church ot 
Christ ? Suppose you answer : The Lutheran. 
Yery well. You mean to say, then, that Christ 
and the Apostles taught the same doctrines, 
the same ordinances, established the same 
Church-government, as Luther professed and 
taught in his turn. The question naturally 
arises, where was that Lutheran Church 
throughout the length of sixteen centuries? 
Point out to the world the Pastors, Teachers, 
Bishops, Pontifis, Fathers, Doctors, who taught 
like Luther. If you cannot do that, you own 
that the Church of Luther, which was the 



THE CHUECH OF CHEIST. 



181 



Church of Christ, failed during sixteen cen- 
turies. Then, during sixteen centuries, men 
could not be saved ; for, according to Luther, 
all must be saved by true faith. 

It will not do to have recourse to an invisi- 
ble church ; for we have proved that an invisi- 
ble church cannot be the Chm^ch of Christ; 
yea, cannot be a church at all. Nor do you 
meet the difficulty by answering that the true 
Church existed there, where the fundamental 
doctrines of Christianity were taught and be- 
lieved by its teachers and its members. For 
the question returns : Where were those fun- 
damental doctrines taught ? In what particular 
Church or Churches ? If you answer, in no 
particular Church, but in all of them together ; 
we urge the question : "What are those funda- 
mental doctrines, and who is to decide upon 
their number as well as their nature ? If an 
authority is necessary to tell us what Christ 
taught ; that same authority is much more ne- 
cessary to determine, with unerring certainty, 
which of these doctrines are fundamental, and 
which are only accessory. For, if we under- 
stand the meaning of our brethren's distinction 
between the fundamental and non-fundamental 
doctrines of Christianity, they hold that the 

former are those which it is absolutely neces- 
16 



182 THE EOMAN CATHOLIC CHTJECH, 

sary to believe in order to have faith, and 
therefore, to be saved ; whereas the latter may 
be admitted or rejected, at will, without there- 
by forfeiting the purity of faith or the hope of 
salvation. Is every individual to determine 
this knotty yet all-important question by him- 
self? Then there will likely be as many faith? 
as there are individuals, and yet faith is essen- 
tially one. Is it left to the judgment of the 
several Churches? Then there is the same 
danger as in the case of the individual ; for 
every Church will use its own judgment and 
authority to determine the nature and the 
number of her fundamental doctrines ; and as 
long as there is no unity among them, there 
can be no unity in the faith. Now, take the 
facts as they stand : Do all the Churches, ac- 
tually existing, outside of the Eoman Catholic 
Church, believe in the same fundamental doc- 
trines and in the same way, as to their mean- 
ing and number ? Among these Churches you 
have the Eastern heretical and schismatical 
Communions called the Greek Church, and 
the Nestorian, Eutycliian, Arabian, Armenian 
Chnrches. Do they hold the same fundamen 
tal doctrines, as the Lutheran, Calvinistic^ 
Anglican, Baptist, Quaker, Methodist, Sweden 
borgian or Campbellite Churches ? Ton know 



THE CHTIECH OF CHRIST. 



183 



they do not. Most of them hold the same doc- 
trines as does the Eoman Catholic, on the 
necessity of the episcopate, the power of the 
priesthood to forgive sins, to consecrate the 
body and blood of Christ. They hold the . 
seven Sacraments, purgatory, invocation oi 
saints, etc., and all of these they consider to be 
fundamental doctrines, without faith in which 
no one can be saved. 

But do the modern sects agree among them- 
selves ? Does the Presbyterian hold the doc- 
trine of episcopacy and priesthood as a funda- 
mental doctrine of Christ's Church ? Does the 
Baptist believe in Infant Baptism as do, or at 
least used to do, the Episcopalians, Presby- 
terians, Methodists, etc. ? Do these latter be- 
lieve it an essential doctrine of Christ, that 
people should be immersed when they receive 
Baptism, as do the Baptists ? Do any of these 
believe, as Luther did, in the Peal Presence 
of the body and blood of Christ in the Lord's 
Supper? Do the TJniversalists consider the 
eternity of hell a fundamental dogma of Chris- 
tianity, as do, till this day, most of the other 
Churches ? Is the Socinian right, is the Uni- 
tarian orthodox, when he discards the Divinity 
of J esus Christ, and considers it fandamental 
to believe only in a divine adoption of tbe Son 



18i THE -ROM A -NT CATHOLIC CHUECH, 

by the Fatlier ? WHcli of the doctrines is fan* 
damental: that man shall be saved by faith 
alone, as Luther, Calvin, and others maintained, 
or that good works are moreover necessary to 
galvation, as Wesley and Swedenborg tanght ? 

Who is to settle these differences, even as to 
fundamentals and non-fundamentals ? The 
Church ? But which Church ? Doubtless no 
other than the one which Christ has appointed 
with fall authority to decide upon these mat- 
ters. That Chm^h is no other — as' om* adver- 
saries themselves concede, when they deny it 
to their own Churches — than the Church of 
Eome, which has always claimed and exercised 
the right, from the beginning of her existence 
in the days of the Apostles, to decide what 
must be believed and done in order to salvation. 

Moreover, on what ground do our separated 
brethren distinguish between fundamental and 
non-fundamental articles of belief? Do they 
not maintain that the Bible is the Word of 
God ; the whole Bible, and every thing that is 
written in the Bible ? If so, is not the whole 
Word of God to be believed? Is there any 
reason for accepting one portion of the Word 
as non-fundamental, any more than another ? 
Is not the Word of God as worthy of our belief 
in one case as in another ? If you have a right 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



185 



to distingmsli between article and article you 
have a right to reject any you please. For it 
will depend on your private judgment to deter- 
mine whether such an article is fundamental oi 
non-fundamental ; whether you can, or cannot, 
be saved without believing it. 

The formal motive of faith is the veracity of 
God, w^ho reveals, and that veracity is as worthy 
of belief in one article of faith as in another. 
He can no more be deceived Himself nor de- 
ceive us, in one than in another; consequently 
we are bound to believe Him whenever we 
know that He has spoken, and to refuse our 
assent is to refuse to believe, and to expose 
ourselves to the dreadful anathema, " He that 
believeth not shall be damned." (Mark. xvi. 16.) 

The Church of Christ, is, in the next place, 
essentially one. None but the Eoman Catho- 
lic Church ever possessed or does now possess 
unity of faith, communion, and government. 
This unity is evident from her constant and 
uninterrupted union with the central head, St. 
Peter, and his successors in the see of Eome. 
" Though," as St. Cyprian reasons most beauti- 
fully, " though extended by her fecundity, the 
Church is one. There are many local, many 
provincial churches, as there were in the days 

of St. Paul. These are as so many branches of 
16* 



186 THE EOMAN CATHOLIC CHUBCH, 



the same tree, so many rays of the same sun ; 
so many rivnlets of the same stream. The 
Church sends forth her rays over the whole 
earth ; yet is the light one, and her nnity is 
nndivided. He that does not hold this nnity 
of the Church, can he think that he holds the 
faith? lie that opposes and withstands the 
Church, can he tnist that he is in the Church ? 
Whoever, separated from the Church, is united 
to an adulteress, is cut off from the promises of 
the Chm'ch. Whoso deserts the Church of 
Christ, obtains not the rewards of Christ. He 
is an alien, he is an enemy. He cannot have 
God for his father who has not the Church for 
his mother." (St. Cyp., De IJnitate Eccl.) And 
the same St. Cyprian calls the chair of Peter 
and the Church of Rome " the principal Church, 
whence the sacerdotal unity took its rise." 
(Ep. lix.) 

St. Athanasius says that whoever falls away 
from her Communion, neither is nor can be 
called a Christian. (Ep. i., ad Scrap.) Lactan- 
tius writes : " The Catholic Church alone re- 
tains the true worship. This is the source of 
truth, this is the dwelling of faith, into which 
he that enters not, and from which he that goes 
out, forfeits the hope of life and of eternal 
salvation." (Inst., lib. iv., c. 30.) 



THi5 CHTIECH OF CHEIST. 



187 



Slie is ever one in her faith. Travel whither 
you will, from pole to pole, from rising to 
setting sun, among barbarians or enlightened 
nations, the Church of Eome holds the same 
articles of faith, administers the same sacra- 
ments, obeys the same government. "When or 
where did she contradict herself on the score 
of her doctrines? Everywhere her bishops 
and her priests preach the same articles of be- 
lief ; everywhere do they threaten the same 
punishment to the imbeliever. She knows no 
national boundaries, no national prejudices, no 
national predilections. She proposes the same 
faith to emperor and king as she does to subject 
and slave. And she did so throughout the 
nineteen centuries of her existence. She is the 
same, when Pius IX. and the bishops define 
the doctrine of the Immaculate Conception, as 
when Peter and the Apostles, in council assem- 
bled, wrote : " For it hath seemed good to the 
Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay no other burden 
upon you than these necessary things," etc. 
(Acts, XV. 28.) Still the same, when hundreds 
of Apostolic missionaries go to announce thf 
Gospel to China, Japan, or the savages of oui 
land, as when St. Paul stood before the Areo- 
pagus arguing on the resurrection, — a unity 
which was never affected by distance of time 



188 THE EOMAN CATHOLIC CHTOCH, 

or space. Still tlie same where perpetual snows 
cover the dreary wastes of the North, and 
where eternal spring clothes the earth with 
fragrant flowers. Still the same where thr 
Arabian pitches his tent amidst the drivin; 
sands of the desert, as where the red man roami 
the bonndless prairie in search of the bison and 
the elk. How beautiful, how sublime, ho\\ 
God-like this unity of faith and union of heart 
which binds our ancestors of nineteen hundred 
years ago to their posterity, in one unbroken 
link of thought and action, without so much as 
the whisper of a dissenting voice! How 
beautiful the spectacle which exhibits king 
and subject, master and slave, husband and 
wife, brother and sister, rich and poor, lettered 
and unlettered, genius and semi-idiot, kneeling 
around the same altars, professing the same 
creed, practising the same ordinances, of one 
mind and one heart, as were the primitive Christ- 
ians mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles ! 

The Church is the home of concord and of 
peace. Bishop meets bishop, priest embraces 
priest, with the same brotherly feeling and love, 
\vhether he comes from Asia, or from Europe, 
from America, or from Africa, because they 
are all of them grafted on the same vine ; be- 
cause the same spirit is diffused through their 



THE CHUECH OF CHRIST. 



189 



hearts, and bringeth forth the same fruit in 
their souls. How different this scene fi^om that 
not unfrequently witnessed in sectarian families 
and Churches. Here the father goes to one, 
the mother to another meeting-house, while the 
children, when grown up, often differ from 
both father and mother, and among themselves, 
in their religious convictions. 

The Church of Eome is the only one which 
is truly Catholic. Her constitution, her doc- 
trines, her sacraments, the form of her govern- 
ment go whithersoever she extends, and she 
extends all over the world. It is she who has 
wrought all the conversions to Christianity, 
that were ever wrought among pagan and bar- 
barous nations. By her pastors and teachers 
were fulfilled the words of Christ : " Go ye into 
the whole world, and preach the Gospel to 
every creature" (Mark, xvi. 15); and those 
others : " Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations, 
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and 
of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ; teaching 
them to observe all things whatsoever I have 
commanded you." (Matt, xxviii. 19, 20.) Of 
the Church in communion with Kome, it was 
always true to say with St. Paul : " Tour faith 
is spoken of in the whole world." (Eom. i. 8.) 
Not to mention the labors of the Apostles, 



190 THE EOHAK CATHOLIC CHUKCH, 

who were her founders, study the work ac- 
complished by their followers in the ministry. 
The success with which they met was so great 
that Tertnllian could defiantly write to the 
authorities of Eome, in the second century ; 
" We are but of yesterday, and we have over 
spread your empire. Tour cities, your islands, 
your forts, your towns, and your assemblies — 
your very armies, wards, companies, tribes, 
palaces. Senate, and Forum, swarm with 
Christians. We have left you nothing but 
your temples." (ApoL, c. 37.) Eemember that 
the Christians were of that class who believed, 
like Tertullian, that there was but one Church, 
and that whoever were not united with that 
Church, were not Christians, and that ''the 
Lord left the keys of that Church to Peter, and 
through him to the Church." (Scorp. x.) 

The seed was sown ; it multiplied from thirty 
to sixty, and, finally, to a hundred fold. 
" Every Christian," says Dcellinger, " became 
an Apostle. The father announced the Gospel 
to his family, the slave to his master, the soldier 
to his companions in arms, and the friend to 
his friend. Many of the new converts devoted 
their whole life to this Apostolic duty." 

St. Gregory, the Enlightener, subjects the 
Armenians to the Cross of Christ, and fulfils 



THE CHURCH OF CHKIST. 



191 



tlie prophecy of Isaiah. (Ts. Ix. 3, etc.) Tiridates, 
their king, believes, as did the Eomans, the 
Corinthians, and Colossians before him. 

As early as the year 326, the faith of the 
Church flourished in the valleys of the Caucasus. 
About the same time the Albanians and the 
adjacent tribes embraced the only saving doc- 
trines of the Church. The Iberians owned her 
gentle sway, the Lazi, Tzanni, and Albasgi 
received the Gospel from missionary priests of 
the Eastern part of the Eoman Empire. 

In the fourth century the fire-worshipping 
Persians bowed down before the divine sun of 
justice, which had risen upon the world from 
Bethlehem. 

The Ethiopians next fulfill the prophecy of 
David, and fall down before the Lord. " The 
kings of Arabia and Saba bring Him gifts." 
(Ps. Ixxi. 9, 10.) 

The Goths, Burgundians and Suevi were 
Catholics long before they became Arians, and 
many years did not elapse before they returned 
to the faith of the " mother and mistress of all 
the Churches." 

Hermenegild had overcome the violence of 
his heretical father, and in dying a martyr's 
death, dropped the mantle of his apostolic zeal 
upon his brother Eiccared, who, on ascending 



192 THE BOMAH GITHOLIC CHUECH, 

tbe throne, professed the Catholic faith^ and 
induced the greater part of his subjects, and 
many heretical bishops, to renounce the errors 
of the Arians. 

During the same century, Theodolinda, aided 
by pious missionaries, became the instrument 
of propagating the Catholic faith among the 
Lombards. 

Meanwhile, the Franks had received the faith 
of Eome from St. Eemigius, and with Clovis, 
three thousand declared themselves Catholics. 

The empire of the C£esars falls to pieces, the 
empire of the Popes builds its throne upon the 
ruins. The standard of the Cross is unfurled, 
where the Eoman eagle had never flapped his 
wings. The voice of the Fisherman was 
obeyed, where decrees of the Senate were con- 
temptuously sneered at, and rejected. 

The great St. Patrick next conquered Ireland 
to the faith, and made her the sanctuary of 
learning and virtue whence issued forth, at 
sundry times, a host of holy missionaries, who, 
in their turn, became the Apostles of foreign 
countries. 

From Ireland the faith spread among the 
Picts by the zeal of St. Columba. The He- 
brides were likewise cliristianized by this great- 
Apostle. 



THE CHUKCH OF CHEIST. 



193 



St. Austin is sent to Britain, and establishes 
the failh there. 

Melitns baptizes the king of Essex ; Panlinns 
converts the chief priest of idolatrous N"orth- 
nmberland and its king. 

The sovereign of East Anglia receives bap- 
tism from Felix, who, in seventeen years, com- 
pletes the conversion of the entire nation. 

Einian converts the middle Angles, and 
Birinns receives the Southwestern Britons into 
the one fold of the one shepherd. 

St. Wilfred completes the conversion of the 
Heptarchy, in 678, by subjecting the inhabi- 
tants of Sussex to the empire of the Cross. 

The Frieslanders, Hollanders, and Zea- 
landers, obey the voice of St. Willibrord, and 
the Danes receive him and his eleven com- 
panions, as they would angels from Heaven. 

Meanwhile, the nations on the Ehine and 
Helvetia, Ehcetia and Yindelicia, had embraced 
the religion of Christ. 

As early as 511, St. Eridolin, after many and 
long labors in France, founded the nunnery of 
Seckingen, and preached the Gospel on both 
banks of the Rhine. 

There was a bishopric in Steiermark at the 
close of the third century ; while Trent in the 
Tyro] had its Catholic prelate in the fourth. ■''^ 
17 



194: THE EOMAN CATHOLIC CHUECH, 

Strasburg sent its first Catholic bishop tu 
tbe Oouncil of Sardica in tlie same century, 
and the name of the Bishop of Spire still 
figures on the records of that illnstrions assem- 
bly. The Bishopric of Treves was founded 
about the same period. Belgium had its 
several bishoprics and representatives in the 
Councils of Sardica and Kimini. Some years 
later, St. Yictricius of Eouen preached the 
Catholic faith in the land of the JSTervii and Mo- 
rini, now called Flanders. St. Severinus had 
catholicized the greatest part of l^oricum, the 
modern Bavaria, and Austria. 

In the seventh century, St. Kilian converts 
Franconia. St. Amandus overthrows the last 
idols in Belgium, and pursues his Apostolic 
labors through Carinthia, and Sclavonia to the 
banks of the Danube. 

In the eight century, St. Boniface converts 
the Germans. 

In the ninth century, St. Sifiroy is sent to 
Sweden, and Anschar builds a Church at 
Schleswig, where he baptized many pagans. 

Eombert continues the successful labors of 
Anschar in Hamburg and Bremen, and Den- 
mark and Norway fulfill the prophecy that 
' the ends of the world shall be converted to the 
Lord." (Ps. xxi, 28.) 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



195 



Iceland was catliolicized in the year one 
thousand^ and the Faroe islands soon fol- 
lowed its example. 

The celebrated JSTorman chief EoUo became 
an humble follower of the faith of Eome shortly 
after the treaty of Epte, in 912, and his warlike 
subjects foUow^ed the example of their leader. 

As early as the year 650, Porga, prince of 
the Croatians, received, with open arms, mis- 
sionary priests sent by Eome, at the request of 
the emperor Constantino Pogonatus ; and the 
Servians, yielding to the inducements held oul 
by Heraclius, became docile children of the 
common Father of the faithful. 

The Carontani were converted in the eighth 
century. 

Arno and Virgilius, Bishops of Salzburg, 
were instruments in the hands of God to con- 
vert the Moravians. 

From Moravia, the Gospel spread through 
Bohemia, and thence it made its way to Po- 
land; bishoprics were founded at Breslau, 
Cracow, Colburg, and Gnesen. 

Benno, Bishop of Misnia, became the 
Apostle of the Sorbi, while Methodius and his 
brother Cyril made known the name of Jesus 
to Russia. Passau wrote in 974 to the Eoman 
Pontiff that the priests whom he had sent into 



196 THE EOMAN CATHOLIC CHUECH, 

Hiingaiy had already baptized more than five 
thousand of the inhabitants, and St. Stephen 
left at his death eleven bishoprics and many 
monasteries, and seminaries for the education 
of young priests. 

We might continue this sketch of Catholicity 
by instancing the conversion of Pomerania, in 
the eleventh, and of the island of Eugen, in 
the twelfth century. The conquests of Eome 
in Livonia, and Cumania, in the thirteenth, 
and in Tartary and Lithuania, in the four- 
teenth century, might furnish as brilliant a 
page for a lecture as they present for history. 

But we must stop here, and give a synopti- 
cal view of the victories which Catholic Eome 
has achieved over infidel and pagan nations 
since the so-called Eeformation. 

The great Apostacy from Rome took place 
in 1517. Shortly after began the conversion 
of the aborigines of Cumana, under the leader- 
ship of Las Casas. In 1521, the kings of Zebu, 
and Messana, the prince and nephew of the 
latter, and five hundred more, were regenerated 
by the waters of baptism. About the same 
time the religion of Home gained ground in 
Yucatan and Mexico. Over twenty-nine 
millions, says Torribio, were baptized within 
the space of twenty years. 



THE CHTJECH OF CHEIST. 197 



In Honduras the conquest of tlie Cliurcli 
kept pace with those of Cortez ; but while the 
harvest was great, the reapers were propor- 
tionately few. 

Meanwhile, the schismatics and heretics of 
the East were not forgotten. Towards the 
middle of the sixteenth century, the Franciscan 
friar, John Franco de Potenza dispelled the 
errors of the Maronites, who, throngh three 
ambassadors, abjured them in the Council of 
Lateran. 

No one needs to be reminded of the more 
than human success of St. Francis Xavier and 
his companions among the Asiatic Indians. 
This one man repaired in great part the losses 
which the Church sustained in Germany, 
Switzerland, France, England, and the northern 
kingdoms. 

It was Catholic missionaries who planted the 
Cross upon the heights of the Citade Alta, and 
the prostrate temples of the sun in Brazil and 
Florida. Anchieta, Peter Correa, and Brother 
John Souza triumphed where the Calvinist 
Peter Eicher, and William Cartier had failed. 

What shaU we say of the Catholic conquests 
in the kingdom of Congo, during the reign of 
king Diego ; and in Hindostan, where, accord- 
ing to Fontana, the Dominicans built eighteen 
17* 



198 THE KOMAN CATHOLIC CHUECH, 

cliurclies and converted sixty tlionsand idola- 
ters to the Chnrcli of Eome. 

Gaspar of the Cross destroyed numerous 
idols in China; Monomotapa admitted the 
services of Father Silveira, and abont the year 
1577, its emperor, his mother Maria, togethei 
with three hundred Caffirs, bowed their neck 
under the sweet yoke of Jesns Christ. 

The inhabitants of the Archipelago of the 
Moluccas hailed JSTnnez and Alfonso de Castro 
with open arms, and in one single village these 
holy men baptized five hundred children. In 
1581, the Dominicans carried the saving word 
to the kingdom of Siam, and baptized many 
converts. 

But, not to become tedious, we must refer 
you for beautiful and interesting details on the 
success of the Catholic Church in converting 
barbarous, and pagan nations, to Doellinger's 
History of the Church, and Henrion's and 
Marshall's works on Catholic missions. 

In our own country, too, the Eoman Catholic 
Church is the only one which has really suc- 
ceeded in reclaiming a portion, at least, of the 
superstitious savages, from their idolatrous 
worship and vicious habits. Wherever the 
"black-robe chief" comes with his guids^ft 



THE CHURCH OF CHEIST. 199 



and companions, there yet takes place the 
Bcene so graphically described by Henry Wads- 
worth Longfellow : 

*^ The noble Hiawatha 
"With his hands aloft extended, 
Held aloft in sign of welcome, 
Waited, full of exultation, 
Till the birch canoe, with paddles. 
Stranded on the sandy margin, 
Till the black-robe chief, the pale face, 
With the Cross upon his bosom. 
Landed on the sandy margin. 
Then the joys of Hiawatha 
Cried aloud, and spoke in this wise : 

Beautiful is the sun, strangers, 
"When you come so far to see us ! 
All our town in peace awaits you ; 
All our doors stand open for you ; 
You shall enter all our wigwams. 
For the heart's right hand we give you. 
Kever bloomed the earth so gaily, 
Never shone the sun so brightly. 
As to-day they shine and blossom 
"When you come so far to see us. 
Kever was our lake so tranquil 
Nor so free from rocks and sand-bars, 
For your birch canoe, in passing, 
Has removed both rock and sand-bar. 
Never before had our tobacco 
Such a sweet and pleasant flavor ; 



200 THE EOMAK CATHOLIC CHUECH, 

"N'ever the broad leaves of our corn-fields 
Were so beautiful to look on, 
As thej seem to us this morning, 
"Wlien you come so far to see us." 

Add to these victories among the heathen 
the daily conquests she makes among the ranks 
of Protestantism in Germany, England, and 
the United States. "Who has not heard of the 
return to the Church of such men as Henry 
Edward, prince of Schoenburg ; F. A. Charles, 
of Hesse Darmstadt ; the Duke of Saxe Gotha; 
of Ingenheim ; Frederick of Mecklenburg ; the 
Duke and Duchess of Anhalt-Coethen ; Princess 
Charlotte Frederic ; the Countess Solm- 
Bareuth ; Count Stolberg ; men of letters and 
science, and statesmen such as Werner, 
Frederic Von Schlegel, Clement Brentano, 
Baron Eckstein, Goerres, Adam Miiller, 
Haller, Esslinger, Hurter; the minister of 
state, Laval ; Petit Pierre, Bermay, and others 
in Switzerland and France; the saintly 
Spencer, the learned Newman, the eloquent 
Manning, the ascetic Faber, Canon Oakley, 
Capes, Northcote, Wilberforce, the ministers of 
Leeds, a dozen or more Fellows of Oxford and 
Cambridge, and scores of distinguished mem- 
bers of the bar, the pulpit and other honorable 
professions in life. 



THE CHUECH OF CHEIST. 



201 



Ton have not forgotten the former Episcopal 
Bishop of North-Carolina, the now zealous and 
devoted Catholic, Dr. Ives ; you remember the 
Brownsons, Walworths, Heckers, Prestons ; the 
judges, Bayne, Bm-nett, Wilkins, Wilkinson ; 
the Huntingtons, Bakewells, and others, many 
of whom sacrificed all earthly hopes, in aban- 
doning their sectarian Churches. Contrast 
these names Vi^ith the Achillis, De Sanctis, 
Hogans, Gavins, Leaheys, Gavazzis, and a few 
others of the same class, and you will be able 
to form an idea of the respective merits of 
those who leave the ranks of Protestantism, to 
join the Church of Eome, and those who leave 
us rather than repent of their insubordination 
and scandalous example. 

On this subject we dare assert, without fear 
of being contradicted, that as far as experience 
goes, no intelligent, well instructed Catholic 
ever left the Church, whose pride had not 
been stung, or whose immoral conduct had not 
brought him under the censure of his ecclesi- 
astical superiors. If there are exceptions to 
these prevailing causes, they must be sought 
in temporal, political, social, or domestic 
interests ; but never can they be imputed to a 
well-grounded conviction that Catholicity was 
wrong, and Protestantism right. 



202 THE EOMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, 

The infallibility of tlie CliHrcli is the next 
of her heavenly prerogatives. We have proved 
that there exists a Church of Christ ; that the 
Church of Christ is one, and that she mnst be 
infallible. If yon have been convinced by onr 
arguments, you are bound to conclude that the 
infallible Church is the Eoman Catholic alone. 
The conclusion is logical. For since there 
must be an infallible Church, and there are no 
claimants to that infallibility, except the 
Eoman Catholic Church, it follows that she is 
really the lawful claimant. 

That none of the many Protestant Churches 
claim any infallibility in deciding questions of 
faith, sacraments, or church-government is a 
fact of history. So far from claiming it, they 
deny its existence and possibility altogether. 

Some of the earlier heresies and schisms, such 
as Nestorianism, Eutychianism, or the Greek 
Church, might be thought to assert this prero- 
gatiye, but certainly it is without any reasona- 
ble grounds. First, because the infallible 
Church of Christ must exist from the days of 
Christ and the Apostles, and the Greek schism 
dates back to the ninth, the Eutychian heresy 
to the fifth, and JSTestorianism to the fourth 
century. Secondly, because, according to their 
own confession, they separated from the Church 



THE CHURCH OF CHRISS 



203 



df Rome because she hadp^^aslifto be tlie 
Chiircli of Christ ; theref^e, ceased to be in- 
fallible ; bitt they., boi&g united with the 
Church of Eoine, must have ceased to be in- 
fallible with her, for ^fliey erred with her, while 
they were united with her ; tha^. is, if the 



Church of Eome did err at all 
that errs, even once, in matt 
morals, is no longer infallibli 
Eastern churches have forfei 
infallibility. If the Church 




t' a church 
faith or 
erefore, the 
heir title to 
ome had not 



erred till the day of their sepration, then they 
erred in separating from h^, and consequently 
ceased to be lawful clah|«!ts for infallibility. 

The Church in ^^■jlunion with Eome has 
never ceased to ^^^Rind to exercise her claim 
as the infalliJ^^Gliurch of Christ. From the 
day on she held her first oecumenical 

council^jn J erusalem^ffll she held the last in 
Treii^^from the tMe that Pope Yictor threat- 
excom^BSunicate, or, as Eusebius has it, 
excjrfmunicate Polycrates, Bish<;>p of 
I'eeping Easter at an undji^e time, 
'communication fulminated against 
ies of the Church in our own days, by 
cesser Pius IX., the Church of Eome has 
Sys asserted unerring authority as her 
fecial and exclusive right^Jbitrusted by Christ 



204 THE EOMAK CATHOLIC CHUBCH, 

to His Apostles in union with St. Peter, and 
to their snccessors till the end of time. This 
fact should have its weight with every reflecting 
mind. Constantly to claim and to exercise a 
right in virtue of which she sat in judgment 
upon every doctrine and practice that did not 
agree with her own ; to cut off from her com- 
munion, without mercy, all those who know- 
ingly and obstinately refused to submit to her 
authority ; to doom to misery here, and eternal 
destruction hereafter, all unrepenting sinners, 
or criminals on these scores, could not have 
been done without serious opposition, not only 
on the part of those who smarted under her 
ban, but on the part of her own children, who 
must needs have known and seen that she had 
no divine right to proceed to such lengths, if 
she were not really the only infallible tribunal 
instituted by Christ. It would be next to im- 
possible to conceive any institution so univer- 
sally corrupt, as to have no members who 
would have the moral courage to remonstrate 
against it for overstepping its own powers, 
when it exercises them publicly and severely as 
did the Church of Eome. Strange, indeed, it 
was, that none of her children should have 
reasoned as follows : One who does not know 
with certainty, cannot decide with certainty ; 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



205 



but you do not know wliat you decide upon 
with certainty, therefore, you cannot decide 
with certainty what is and what is not to "be 
believed and done unto salvation. Stranger 
still, that none should continue the argument, 
and say : Whoever condemns without sufficient 
knowledge, condemns unjustly ; but you con- 
demn other doctrines and practices without 
sufficient knowledge, therefore, you condemn 
them unjustly. This would be the more 
readily objected, because she would act un- 
justly towards her own children, as we said, 
in making it obligatory on them, under pain of 
eternal damnation, to believe her decisions to 
be the decisions of Christ and the Holy Ghost. 
Such tyranny could not but meet with stern 
and constant opposition. And yet the Church 
has always pursued this course of conduct 
towards heretics and schismatics whose errors 
were to be condemned in her councils ; towards 
pagans and infidels, whom she was to convert 
by her missionaries ; towards catechumens, 
whom she instructed by her priests and bishops ; 
towards her own children whom she warned 
against seduction. A testimony so universal, 
exposed to so many evident absurdities if false, 
or probably false, given by those whose every 

interest for time and eternity were at stake; 
18 



206 THE EOSIAJiT CiiTHOLIC CHUECH, 

borne to her by every nation in every clinie, 
against the natural inclination of the heart, 
against the dictates of natural reason, which, 
in cases of doubt, generally asserts its own 
liberty rather than submit to a doubtful au- 
thority, such testimony as this of her own in- 
fallibility must stand as infallibly true ; — for a 
testimony which is based upon such grounds 
as these, is, according to all sound philosophy, 
an infallible criterion of the truth which is as- 
serted. 

But, even on mere Protestant principles, she 
has, to say the least, as much right to assert 
her own infallibility as they have to deny it, 
and with greater certainty than Protestantism 
can possibly have for its denial. Protestantism 
asserts the right of private interpretation for 
every individual. The members of the Church, 
therefore, have as much right to interpret the 
meaning of the Scripture as they themselves. 
If, then, all the members of the Church assert 
vnth one voice that the texts which we have 
often quoted in our last lecture prove the in- 
fallibility of the Church, on what ground can 
our dissenting brethren justly condemn the as 
sertion? This argument gains in strength 
when we reflect that the Protestants themselves 
are not agreed among themselves upon the real 



THE CHUECH OF CKRIST. 



207 



and precise meaning of these texts, whereas 
the interpretation given by the members of the 
Eoman Catholic Chm'ch is invariably the same 
throughout the ages of her existence. 

Add to this that the Church was in posses- 
sion of the Scriptures, and of their meaning, 
before they were entirely written, and upward 
of two hundred years before they were declared t 
authentic and inspired by her rulers. She had 
taught all the doctrines which they contain, all 
the practices which they enjoin ; she had acted 
with the fulness of her authority upon the 
promises of her infallibility, so that she prac- 
tically asserted the meaning of those texts, be- 
fore they were written. She had taught the 
nations, she had preached the Gospel to well 
nigh every creature, she had held a solemn 
oscumencial council, and she had exercised the 
power of excommunication, before her doc- 
trines were either written or pronounced upon 
as containing the Word of God. This she 
could not have done (as we saw before) without 
great injustice to the people whom she taught^ 
and the rebellious subjects whom she placed 
under her ban, and delivered over, as St. Paul 
did, to the power of Satan, unless she was in- 
fallibly certain of the meaning of those texts. 
The Eoman Catholic Church, therefore, is the 



208 THE ROMAIT CATHOLIC CHUIBCH, 

infallible Chiircli promised by the Scriptures ; 
therefore, slie is the Church of Christ. If in- 
fallible, then, all her decisions on matters oi 
faith and morals, are essentially true, are the 
decisions of the Apostles and of Christ — the 
decisions of the spirit of truth, who was pro- 
mised to the Church, and who would teach her 
all truth, who would abide with her forever^ 
and bring back to her mind whatsoever Christ 
had taught her. 

Once convinced of this fundamental princi- 
ple, there can be no longer a difficulty in the 
way of any one, young or old, learned or un- 
learned, civilized or barbarian, to find out, 
with a corresponding infallible certainty, what 
he is to believe and to do in order to be saved. 
All that is required of him is to go to Mother 
Church, and ask her : " What do you teach on 
this and that subject ? What do you teach on the 
Trinity, on the Incarnation, on the procession of 
the Holy Ghost, on baptism, on confession, on the 
Eucharist, on the saints, purgatory, prayers for 
the dead, indulgences, and so on Whatever 
answer she gives you on any of these subjects, 
you know is the answer which Jesus Christ 
Himself, which the Holy Ghost would give 
you, if they were visibly present, in reply to 
youi' interrogations. Admit her infallible au- 



THE CHTTECH OF CHRIST. 209 

thority to teach, to administer the sacraments, 
to govern herself, and your mind is secure* 
you have found the easy, the certain, the infal- 
lible rule of faith. We insist upon this ques- 
tion, because it is for ourselves, as well as for 
our brethren, the question of questions. With- 
out infallibility there is no certainty, without 
certainty there is no faith, without faith it is 
impossible to be saved. Again, according to 
our separated brethren, there is no infallibility 
in their chm^ches; according to our former 
proofs, there can be none in the elder churches, 
such as the Greek, Nestorian, etc. ; therefore, 
since there must needs be an infallible Church, 
and there can be no other than the Church in 
communion with Rome, the Roman Catholic 
Church is infallible, and therefore the Church 
of Christ. But the Church of Christ alone 
possesses the saving faith, therefore without the 
faith of the Church of Eome none can be saved. 
Hence, if you desire to be saved, you must 
abandon your errors, clear up your doubts, 
shake off your apathy, and knock at her door, 
that you may enter her house, which is the 
dwelling of Christ. Besides its infallible cer 
tainty, this rule of faith has all other necessary 
conditions. It is easy. What more easy than 

to find a teacher, who by his office is bound to 
18* 



210 THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHrECH, 

devote his life to tlie instruction and tlie gui- 
dance of his people. The more so, that the 
Church of Eome is, as we said before, truly 
Catholic, and her pastors can be found in every 
country under the sun ? It is universal. It is 
within the reach of all. All cannot read, — all 
that can read, cannot read intelligently, — all 
have not the time to read, — all cannot get a 
copy of the Bible to read, — but all can go to a 
teacher, listen to him ; and when they doubjb, 
question him, till their doubt is removed. 
When they are dull of understanding, they 
can return, and return again to the task. The 
teacher can accommodate himself to the capa- 
cities of all. He can question his pupils and 
ascertain whether they have seized his mean- 
ing, — whether they desire any further explana- 
tion. In one word, the Catholic rule of faith 
is all that it must and can be to satisfy the 
wants of all in all times, and among all nations. 

It is the natural rule, or in other words, a 
rule dictated by sound reason and common 
sense. ITatural reason and experience dictate 
that all things necessary to the preservation of 
human life should be taught us by those whom 
God has placed over us as the secondary causes 
of our existence. The same law holds good in 
an order of things which it is much more diffi- 



THE CHUKCH OF CHRIST. 



211 



CTilt to learn than the laws of self-preserv^ation. 
If we have need of a guide to teach ns the ex- 
pression and the meaning of the expressions of 
onr natural wants, how much more have we 
need of learning the expressions and the mean- 
ing of the expressions which convey our super- 
natural wants ? If, without guidance, without 
instruction in the manner of securing our 
earthly prosperity, we need the voice of au- 
thority and experience, how much more do we 
need an authority which can, with infallible 
certainty, direct us in the way of securing the 
eternal interests of our immortal souls ? This 
the Roman Catholic Church does for her chil- 
dren. She does not give them a dead letter, 
however holy and divine, and say to them: 
" Take this book, study it, read it, interpret it 
for yourself; make your eternal fortune or 
misfortune ; as you understand it, so you will 
fare but she takes her children on her knees, 
presses them to her bosom, and says : " Come 
hither and hear the word of the Lord your 
God." (Jos. iii. 9.) " Come, children, hearken 
to me. I will teach you the fear of the Lord." 
(Ps. xxxiii. 12.) Her children come, they 
hearken, and they learn the word of the Lord 
their God, and they walk in his holy fear. 
Self-education in religion is as impossible as in 



212 THE EOMAN CATHOLIC CHUECH, 

human science, and even more so. We learn 
every thing from others, the most we can do 
of ourselves, is to improve upon the principles 
we have been taught, in a practical manner, or 
"by way of practical application. We draw 
conclusions, we do not generate principles. 
The principles are given us; they are trans- 
mitted to us in one way or in another, but 
always by way of instruction, by way of com- 
munication. Language itself, the medium of 
our thoughts, is not originated, it is commu- 
nicated. How much more so the language of 
Heaven ? If the word of man needs an inter- 
preter, how much more so the word of God ? 
Observe, beside, that the world proceeds on an 
implicit conviction of the human infallibility 
of the teachers in matters that concern the pres- 
ervation of human life. The child never 
doubts the accuracy of the alphabet it has 
been taught by its mother. It never, even 
in maturer years, calls A, B, 0, by any 
other name than those given by its first in- 
structors. The value of arithmetical numbers 
and algebraical quantities remain the same to 
a Laplace at the age of sixty, as at the age of 
six. God has willed it so, and it is well it 
should be so. Why, then, should we refuse to 
accept a teacher of truths, that lie without the 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



213 



range of our natural reason ? Surely we can- 
not object to shcIl an order of things on the 
score of its intrinsic impossibility. Is there 
any thing impossible to God? Is there no 
natural infallibility among men? Are there 
DO intuitions of reason, of which she is infalli- 
bly certain? Can reason mistake when she 
asserts that two and two are fom', that a part 
is less than the whole? Are not our senses 
under certain circumstances applied to their 
proper objects, an infallible criterion of truth ? 
What prevents God from establishing an infal- 
lible criterion of truth in things which regard 
His divine revelation? What prevents Him 
from assisting a body of men, by His divine 
grace, so as to place their intuitions of, or rea- 
sonings on His Heavenly Truths, above the 
danger of illusion or deception ? 

The true Church of Christ must be holy, as 
well as infallible. Hence, if the Church of 
Rome is the Church of God, she must be holy 
in her Founder, holy in her doctrines, holy in 
her sacraments, holy by the lives of her chil- 
dren. And such she undoubtedly has been, and 
is till this very day. Her founders, as we have 
Been, are Jesus Christ and the Apostles ; and 
who dares doubt the holiness either of the doc- 
trines which they taught, the sacraments which 



214 THE ROMAN CAmOLIC CHUKCHj 

they administered, or their personal sanctity ? 
But the doctrines tanght by Christ and the 
Apostles, the sacraments administered by 
them, were to remain, and are still the doc- 
trines, the sacraments of the Eoman Catholic 
Church ; therefore, she is holy in her doctrines 
and in her sacraments. 

To be convinced of the personal holiness of 
millions of her children, yon need bnt open 
the annals of history. There you read of men 
and women, in every age, and in every country 
through which the Catholic religion spread^ 
who gave every possible evidence of fulfilling, 
in their daily conduct, the saying of the Apos- 
tle : " This is the will of God, your sanctifica- 
tion." (1 Thess. iv. 3.) Scrupulous observers 
of the commandments of God, they fulfilled 
the whole law and the prophets. Many of 
them went further, and practised the evangel- 
ical counsels, so highly recommended by Christ 
and the Apostles. How many millions of the 
children of the Church followed that saying of 
the Lord, " Be ye perfect, as also your Heavenly 
Father is perfect" (Matt. v. 48) ; and, " If thou 
wilt be perfect, go, sell what thou hast, and 
give to the poor, and come, follow me." (lb 
xix. 21.) How many, wishing to be true dis- 
ciples of Christ, left their father, mother, broth* , 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



ers, sisters, lands, estates, and all tliat they liad 
dear and near in this world, that they might 
the more closely imitate their Master, who, 
being rich, became poor for our sakes. Wit- [^w^ 
ness the hermits and anchorets of the first ages ; . ^ | 
witness all the religions orders of men and ^ ' 
women that have sprung up under the foster- 
ing influence of the Church of Home. Witness 
the chastity of her countless virgins ; the spirit 
of prayer in her contemplatives ; the spirit of 
mortification in her penitential orders ; the 
spirit of charity in her various institutions of 
mercy and benevolence ; the spirit of elevated 
love in her million martyrs. 

Cast a retrospective glance over the cata- 
logue of her saints, holy missionaries, and re- 
ligious, during the nineteen hundred years of 
her existence, and then show us something — 
we do not say equal — but similar, to the array. 
Show us, in our own day, a clergy, who, like 
ours, follow the advice of Christ concerning 
continency, and fulfill the wish of St. Paul, 
who desired that all might be like him in this 
regard. Show us an order like the sisterhood 
of the " Good Shepherd," who, without any 
earthly recompense, without even the hope of 
ordinary gratitude, on the part of those un- 
fortunate creatures to whose moral reformation 



216 THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, 

they devote their every care, live only to do 
good to such as the world rejects as hopeless 
castaways. Show us a " Sisterhood of Mercy,'' 
where the poor servant girl finds a shelter, 
whom a cruel master, or a whimsical mistress, 
after depriving her of her just wages, and load- 
ing her with reproaches, abandons, upon the 
street, homeless and friendless. Every Church 
has its needs. There are orphans to be cared 
for; deaf and dumb to be taught ; the maimed, 
the blind, the decrepit, to be fed and clothed ; 
there are sick to be nursed ; poor children to 
be instructed, — show us another Church, be- 
sides the Eoman Catholic, in which you find 
devoted " Little Sisters," heroic " Sisters of 
charity, " Sisters of Providence," " of the 
Cross," " of St. Joseph," who, all, according to 
their own spirit, provide for these wants, min- 
istering to them with an angel's care, and an 
angel's love. Observe, moreover, that most of 
the virtues practised in the Church by her 
saintly children, are above the power of fallen 
nature, and can be practised, constantly and 
perseveringly, only with the assistance of Di- 
vine grace. It is not a dictate of human 
nature which makes a man renounce father, 
mother, wealth, hope of inheritance, and lead 
a life of voluntary poverty. It is not the 



4 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



217 



voice of nature wliicli bids a man refrain from 
the enjoyment of lawful pleasures, that lie may 
the better devote himself to the Lord. IsTor is 
t an impulse of the fallen heart of man, to 
give up his own will, and seek his true freedom 
in dependence on, and entire obedience to 
his superiors. Yet these virtues have always 
flourished, and still continue to flourish, in our 
Church, and in ours only. So far are other 
churches fi;om practising them, that they ridi- 
cule the observance of the evangelical counsels 
as something absurd, and deserving only con- 
tempt or pity. 

That God approved the sanctity of His ser- 
vants by many signs and wonders, is a fact of 
history which it would be too tedious to de- 
velop in these pages. Any one who desires to 
be convinced of the facts in the case, may read 
the " Lives of the Saints," by Alban Butler, or 
any of the numerous ecclesiastical histories. 

We know that it is customary among a 
class in other churches to denounce the im- 
morality of the clergy, detail the corruption 
which reigns in monasteries, and write tirades 
against the vices of Catholic countries. We 
are^ aware that some scruple not to identify the 
Church of Home with every thing that is 

wicked, criminal, abominable in iniquity ; that 
19 



21 S THE EOMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, 

they apply to her names borrowed from the 
Apocalypse and the Prophets which modesty 
forbids ns to set down on paper ; but we know, 
too, that such has been the conduct of all the 
enemies of Christ and the Church throughout 
the ages. The Scribes and Pharisees, who 
were outwardly great sticklers for the law; 
who made a show of fasting and almsgiving ; 
who talked constantly of the Scriptures and the 
Covenant, found fault with Chidst and His 
Apostles ; slandered them ; invented all man- 
ner of lies against them; yet the Saviour, 
whose judgments were always true, said of 
them : that they did " all these works to be 
seen of men ;" that they were full of pride, be- 
cause they made their phylacteries broad, and 
enlarged their fringes ; that they loved the first 
places at feasts, and the first chairs in the 
synagogues, and salutations in the market- 
places, and to be called by men, Rabbi ; and 
addressing them, He said : " Wo to you. Scribes 
and Pharisees, hypocrites ; because you make 
clean the outside of the cup and of the dish, 
but within you are full of extortion and im 
cleanness. Wo to you Scribes and Pharisees, 
hypocrites, because you are like to whited 
sepulchres, which outwardly appear to men 
beautiful, but within are full of dead men's 



THE CHUEOH OF CHRIST. 



219 



bones, and of all filthiness. So yon, also, out- 
wardly, indeed, appear to men just, bnt within 
you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity." (Matt, 
xxiii, 25, 27, 28.) We know that there are 
those who are called the leaders of others, who 
never weary of describing the ungodliness of 
Catholics ; their breaking of the Sabbaths of 
the Lord, and the like ; but we remember that 
all these things happened to our Master, and 
yet He said to His censors : " Blind guides, 
who strain out a gnat, and swallow a camel." 
(Ibid 24.) History repeats itself. The impure 
and filthy Gnostics, who gave themselves up 
to every abomination, called the Catholics 
Psychici, that is to say, mere animals, while 
they styled themselves spiritual, or perfect. 
(St. Irenseus, ch. vi.) So did the Montanists. 
The Donatists arrogated to themselves the 
title of ju8t^ and derided Catholics as sinners 
and traitors. All of us know the morality of 
the Latter Days" Saints, and every reader of 
history knows the lives of the so-called first 
reformers : Luther, Calvin, Henry YHL, Ed- 
ward YL, Queen Elizabeth, and others. We 
do not deny that there have been, and still are, 
bad Catholics. But we do deny, that they are 
such in virtue of their religious principles. 
Our lessons in morality never were, that we 



220 THE EOMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, 

have no free will of our own : that we are to 
be saved or damned without any regard to our 
rood or evil works ; that good works are bad 
works ; that the best of them are venial sins, 
as Luther taught, and many after him. All 
we contend for is, that our separated brethren 
should contrast the lives of their progenitors in 
the faith, with those of ours ; the conduct, in 
general, of our ministers with theirs ; of our 
people with their people. It is easy to find 
exceptions to general rules. It is not difficult 
to find a Judas among twelve Apostles ; but 
let them find as many holy men and women, 
and as many confessors and martyrs of the 
faith, as many virgins, as we can point to in 
history, all of whom derived their sanctity 
from the principles of our faith, and we shall 
be willing to ovm, that where the greatest 
sanctity is, there, also, is the best religion. 

Here we leave the argument that the Roman 
Catholic Church is the Church of Christ, and 
we beg our readers to give it a serious, an at- 
tentive perusal. 

We are aware that there are objections to 
the argument, and we are ready to meet them 
in the same spirit in which we are writing 
these pages. 

The first of these objections is this : From 



THE CHURCH OF CHEIST. 221 

the course of reasoning wMcIl you have pur- 
sued, it would follow that out of the Church of 
Eome there is no salvation. Logically, this 
conclusion follows fi^om our premises, and we 
do not shrink from it. ISTor is this doctrine 
our own. It is taught most clearly by the 
Scriptures. Our Divine Saviour positively as- 
serts: "He that believeth not shall be con- 
demned," or damned, as the authorized version 
of our separated brethren has it : again, om* 
Saviour says, in St. John : " He that doth not 
believe, is condemned already, because he be- 
lieveth not in the name of the only begotten 
Son of God." (John, iii. 18.) St. Paul tells 
us that " without faith it is impossible to please 
God." (Heb. xi. 6.) The same Apostle wrote 
two epistles to prove the same truth. One of 
these is to the Eomans, in which he informs 
them, that both Jews and Gentiles, before they 
receive the faith, are all under sin : " That 
the justice of God is by faith of Jesus Christ 
unto all, and upon all them that believe, for 
there is no distinction (Eom. iii. 22), all have 
sinned . . . being justified gratis by his grace 
through the redemption that is in Jesus Christ. 
(Eom, iii. 24.) But we have proved that there 
is and can be but one faith, and that faith is 

to be found in the Eoman Catholic Church 
19* 



222 THE EOMAN CATHOLIC CHTJECH, 

only; tlierefore, ont of the Eoman Catholic 
Chnrch there is no salvation. 

In order to have the true faith, we mnst be 
subject to the Church; for Christ says: "He 
that will not hear the Church let him be to 
you as the heathen and the publican" (Matt 
xviii. 17) ; but heathens and publicans are out 
of the path of salvation ; therefore, since the 
Church of Eome is the Church of Christ, there 
is no salvation out of the Church of Eome. 

St. Paul reckons heresies or sects among the 
works of the flesh of which he says : " They 
who do such things shall not obtain the king- 
dom of God." (Gal. V. 21.) But it has been 
proved that all churches, except the Church of 
Eome, are heretical or schismatical ; therefore, 
those who are not in the Church of Eome can- 
not inherit the kingdom of God. 

In the Acts we read that " the Lord added 
daily to their society (the Church) such as should 
be saved " (ii. 4:1) ; therefore, to be saved it is 
necessary to belong to the Church; but that 
Church is the Church of Eome ; therefore, out 
of her communion there is no hope of salvation. 

The Apostle St. Paul writes : " JSTow, I be- 
seech you, brethren, to mark them who caused 
dissensions, and offences, contrary to the doc- 
trine which you have learned, and avoid them. 



THE CHUECH OF CHRIST. 



223 



For they that are such, serve not Christ our 
Lord " (Eom. xvi. 17, 18) ; but they that do 
not serve Christ our Lord, cannot be saved; 
and sects and heresies cause dissensions, and 
offences, contrary to the doctrine of the Apos 
ties ; therefore, all such cannot be saved^ But 
the Church of Eome alone has always avoided 
such ; therefore, out of her bosom there is no 
salvation. 

Again : " But though we, or an angel from 
heaven, preach a Gospel to you besides that 
which we have preached to you, let him be 
anathema." (Gal. i. 8.) The Gospel, there- 
fore, is essentially one ; but the sects do not hold 
the unity of the Gospel ; therefore, none can 
be saved, save in union with Eome. 

" A man that is a heretic, after the first and 
second admonition, avoid : knowing that he, 
that is such a one, is subverted, and sinneth, 
being condemned by his own judgment." 
(Titus, iii. 10, 11.) 

If a heretic is to be avoided, when he does 
not renounce his heresy ; if he is subverted, if 
he sinneth, if he is condemned by his own 
judgment, and dies impenitent, he cannot be 
saved; but all those who wilfully and know- 
ingly reject any of the doctrines of the Church 
of Christ are heretics, and the Church of Eome 



224: THE KOMAN CATHOLIC CHUECH. 



is tlie Clmrcli of Christ ; therefore, any one, 
dying wilfully and deliberately, out of the 
Chnrch of Eome, cannot be saved. 

St. Jude tells ns that all such men as deny 
the faith are " clouds without water, which are 
carried about by winds, trees of the autumn 
unfruitful, twice dead, plucked up by the roots, 
raging waves of the sea, foaming out their own 
confusion, wandering stars to whom the storm 
of darkness is reserved for ever." (Jude, i. 
12, 13.) 

The doctrine of exclusive salvation appeared 
so reasonable to the reformers themselves, that 
they all adopted it as an article of their creed. 

Luther reproached Zwingle for having fallen 
into the modern error of admitting all promis- 
cuously to the kingdom of Heaven. 

The Anglican Church declared in the eigh- 
teenth of the Thirty-Nine Articles, to which 
all the clergy were obliged to subscribe, that 
"those are to be accursed who presume to say, 
that every man shall be saved by the law or 
sect which he professeth, so that he be diligent 
to frame his life according to that law and the 
light of nature." ; : 

The Protestants of Scotland in their profes- 
sion of faith, in the year 1561, say: "As we 
believe in one God, the Father, the Son, and 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST 



225 



the Holy Spirit, so we firmly believe, that there 
was from the beginning, that there now is, and 
that to the end of the world there will always 
be, one Church, which is the Catholic, that is, 
the universal Church, out of which there is 
neither life nor everlasting happiness." (Conf. 
Scot., cap. 16.) 

The Protestants of Switzerland, in their pro- 
fession of faith, in the year 1566, say: "We 
set so great a value on being in communion 
with the true Church of Christ, that we affirm, 
those cannot have life in the sight of God who 
are not in communion with the true Church of 
God, but separate themselves from it." (Conf. 
Helv., cap. 16.) 

The Dutch, in their profession of faith of the 
year 1561, approved by the Synod of Dort, in the 
year 1619, say in the Twenty-seventh Article : 
" We believe and confess one only Catholic or 
universal Church." And in the Twenty-eighth : 
"Since this holy society and congregation is 
the society of those who are to be saved, and 
since there is no salvation out of it, we believe 
that no one of what place or dignity soever he 
be, ought to separate himself from it, to live 
apart by himself; but that all are equally 
bound to join themselves to it, and to be united 
with it, to preserve the Church's unity, to sub- 



226 THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, 

mit to its doctrine and discipline, and to snb- 
ject their necks to tlie yoke of Christ." (Conf. 
Belg., Art. 27, 28.) 

The French Protestants ask the following 
question in their catechism : " Why is this 
article of forgiveness of sins pnt after that of 
the Church ?" " Answer. Because no one ob- 
tains pardon of his sins, unless he be first in- 
corporated with the people of God, and con- 
tinue in unity and communion with the body 
of Christ, and so be a member of the Church." 
" Q. Out of tlie Church, then, there is nothing 
but death and damnation?" "A. It is cer- 
tain ; for none of those who withdraw from the 
communion of the faithful to make a sect 
apart, ought to hope for salvation, as long as 
they continue separated." 

It is not necessary to prove that the same 
doctrine was taught in all ages since the com- 
mencement of Christianity. It was the doc- 
trine of St. Ignatius, martyr, who, in his epistle 
to the Philippians, declares that whosoever fol- 
lows those that make a separate communion, 
shall not inherit the kingdom of God. St. 
Irenaeus describes the Church as having but 
one soul, one heart and mouth, dwelling in one 
house, and adds : " She is the gate of life, but 
all the rest are thieves and robbers, and there- 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



227 



fore to be avoided." (Adv. Hser., iii.) St. 
Clement of Alexandria says: "The ancient 
and Catholic Church is but one in her sub- 
stance, origin, and excelleuce." (Lib. Strom., 
vii.) 

St. Cyprian wrote a whole work to prove the 
necessity of being a member of the one only 
true Church, out of which, he says, there is no 
salvation. 

" But is it not uncharitable to say that there 
is no salvation out of the Church of Eome ?" 

We answer, is it uncharitable to tell a man 
the truth, when his very life is in peril? Is it 
uncharitable in a physician, for instance, to 
warn his patient that there is great danger of 
his dying, if he refuses to comply with certain 
prescriptions and regulations regarding his diet 
and the like ? Is it uncharitable for a mother 
to caution her child against such and such com- 
pany, because she has reason to know that 
the child will be ruined by it ? Would it be 
uncharitable in you to inform your friend of 
a plot which his enemies are making against 
his life, and which he can avoid by seeking 
shelter in your house ? If the Church believed 
that men may and can be saved by any religion, 
or even without any, it would be uncharitable in 
her to tell the world that out of her bosom 



228 THE EOMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, 

there is, ordinarily speaking, no salvation. 
But, as we have proved, she maintains that 
there can be but one faith, as there is but one 
Lord of all, and that she is in possession of that 
one faith. She knows from the Bible that 
without faith it is impossible to please God or 
to be saved, hence it is very charitable in hei 
to announce to the world that all must seek 
salvation through her. 

It is true, therefore, that no one shall be 
saved out of the Church, — most undoubtedly 
true. 

"Then, my parents before me, are all in 
hell, because they died out of the Church of 
Eome?" 

To answer this question, you must distin- 
guish certain truths, and carry out the distinc- 
tion in applying them to individual cases. 
When we say that out of the Church of Eome 
there is no salvation, we do not assert that all 
must needs be externally united to that Church, 
and externally profess her faith and practices. 
For there are persons who, through invincible 
necessity or invincible ignorance, cannot be 
outwardly united to the Church of Eome, and 
yet die in her bosom. Let us suppose the case 
of a man who is suddenly stricken by apoplexy^ 
He has consciousness enough left him to look 



THE CHUECH OF CHEIST. 



229 



into himself, repent of his sins, and desire bap- 
tism ; he receives the grace to believe all that 
our Lord may have revealed, though he ac- 
tually knows very few if any of the doctrines 
of Christ in detail. There is no minister, no 
priest, no person present to instruct him or 
baptize him, yet he is so disposed in his heart, 
that he would do any thing that might be re- 
quired of him, if he had the opportunity. That 
man dies. Does he die a Protestant or an in- 
fidel? Apparently, to those who knew him 
before his death, he died as he lived, either a 
Protestant or an infidel. Is it so in the eye of 
God ? By no means ; in the eyes of God and 
of the Church, he dies a very good Catholic, 
because he had every disposition that was ne- 
cessary to be outwardly joined to the Catholic 
communion. He belonged to the soul, as theo- 
logians say, though he was not outwardly nnited 
to the body of the Church. Hence we are 
taught to suspend our judgment as to the sal- 
vation or reprobation of those who die appa- 
rently out of our communion ; it is a question 
which we leave to God, who searcheth the 
earts and reins of man. 
True, the Church does not perform any ex- 
ternal rites for those who die out of her bosom, 
and with good reason. For, since they were 
20 



230 THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, 

outwardly joined to other religions, or made 
public profession of infidelity, she cannot pos- 
sibly treat them, in her external service, other- 
wise than they treated her during their lifetime. 
But her children may, if there be no certainty 
of their reprobation, pray for them privately, 
and remember them in their works of penance 
or devotion. No Catholic need be more Cath- 
olic than his mother the Church. She teaches 
that heresy and unbelief are sins, and deadly 
sins, which exclude those who die in them from 
the kingdom of Heaven. But she also teaches 
that two things are necessary to commit a 
mortal sin: sufficient knowledge of the evil, 
and malice of the will. And as there may bo 
persons who, for want of these conditions, com- 
mit an action which is materially wrong, but 
formally not criminal, so there may be, and 
doubtless are, persons who live in material in- 
fidelity or heresy, without being formally guilty 
of that crime in the sight of God. Should such 
persons be invincibly ignorant of their obliga- 
tion to leave sectarian churches or any other 
association, and to join themselves to the Ro- 
man Cathohc Church, should they have been 
baptized or desire to be baptized and repent for 
their sins, believing all that God wishes them 
to believe, they die Roman Catholics. By this 



THE CHIJRCH OF CHRIST, 



231 



we do not mean to convey the idea that it is 
all the same to which religion a man belongs. 
We merely say, that a person who is invinci- 
bly ignorant of the Chm^ch, and puts no other 
obstacles in the way to heaven, may be saved, 
though outwardly he is not joined to the Church. 
We believe this to be the case with a great 
many good, simple country people, who never 
heard of the Church of Eome, never read any 
of her doctrines ; who conscientiously believe 
themselves right in their own religion, and who, 
if they but knew that the Church of Eome is 
the Church of Christ, would immediately re- 
nounce their error, and enter the one fold of 
the one Shepherd. 

We believe this to be the case with a srreat 
many children born of sectarian or infidel 
parents, whose religion is neglected, and who 
are never* spoken to on the subject; these, 
living in ignorance of their duty, and dying in 
that invincible ignorance, will be saved if they 
have wilfully put no other obstacle to their sal- 
vation. 

But the same exception does not apply to 
those w^ho have the opportunity of becoming 
acquainted with the true Church of Christ, and 
wilfully reject or neglect availing themselves 
of it. Much less to those who know that the 



f 



232 THE EOlVrAN CATHOLIC CHTJECH, 

Catholic Clmrcli is the only saving Church, but 
dare not enter her communion, for fear of 
the world, or through motives of interest. 
These persons act in opposition to their own 
conscience, and evidently live in sin; con- 
sequently, can never hope to be saved, so long 
as they remain in that disposition of mind. 
Alas, how many such are there among our 
Protestant and infidel countrymen ! How 
many who depend upon their relatives or their 
friends for whatever religious opinions they 
form for themselves. How many who dread 
the prospect of being called a Papist ; of being 
looked upon with contempt, abandoned by 
their friends, insulted by their foes, disinherited 
by their relations, and who sell their soul as 
Esau sold his birthright, for a mess of pottage, 
or, like Judas, barter their eternal salvation for 
a handful of silver. Of such the Holy Spirit 
says : " I called, and you refused : I stretched 
out My hand, and there was none that regar- 
ded ; you have despised all My counsels, and 
have neglected My reprehensions : I will also 
laugh in your destruction, and will mock when 
that shall come to you which you feared. When 
sudden calamity shall fall on you, and destruc- 
tion, as a tempest, shall be at hand ; when 
tribulation and distress shall come upon you ; 



THE CHUECH OF CHKIST. 



233 



then shall they call upon Me, and 1 will not 
hear ; they shall rise in the morning, and shall 
not find Me : because they have hated instruc- 
tion, and received not the fear of the Lord.'' 
Proverbs, i. 24, etc.) 

" But does not the Church of Eome make new 
articles of faith, and thus prove that she fluctu- 
ates in her doctrines, that she is neither one, 
nor Catholic, nor indefectible 2" 

The Church defines articles of faith, but she 
does not make new ones. She holds in her 
depository all and every truth revealed by 
Almighty God, but she does not always pro- 
pose every article of faith, in particular, to the 
express belief of her children under the penalty 
of eternal damnation. She obliges her children 
to believe all that was revealed, whether 
through Scripture or tradition, but she does 
not always define under anathema every par- 
ticular article of that revelation. This she 
does when heresies or schisms make it neces- 
sary to show her subjects what must be be- 
lieved, on the score of the doctrines or practices 
which are impugned by error. Thus the Coun- 
cil of Nice defined the consubstantiaHty of the 
Son with the Father, against Arius, though 
the Church had always believed this doctrine 
from the days of the Apostles. In a similar 
20* 



234 THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, 

manner did slie define many of her doctrines 
against Lntlier in the Conncil of Trent, al- 
though she had taught and believed them be- 
fore the uprising errors made it necessary to 
define them in so many precise and accurate 
terms. In the same way she defined, some 
years ago, the doctrine of the Immaculate Con- 
ception of the Ever blessed Virgin Mary. 
Previously to her solemn decisions on these 
matters she, at times, allows her children that 
freedom of discussion which, while it is dis- 
posed to abide by her decision, caUs in question 
the fact of the revelation of the still undefined 
doctrines. Nor does she thereby forfeit her 
title to unity. For, there is this difference 
between the denial by a heretic of any of the 
doctrines of the Church, and a denial by her 
own subjects, that the latter remain always 
willing to abide by her authority, no matter 
what decision she may come to, when she will 
deem it necessary, or useful, to define her doc 
trine, or any given subject of revelation ; while 
the heretic obstinately refuses to recognize and 
to abide by that authority. When Catholic 
doctors, or divines, dispute concerning certain 
dogmas still undefined by the Church in her 
solemn councils, or by the Pope, with the con- 
Bent of the bishops, they continue to profess 



THE CHUECH OF CHRIST. 



235 



an implicit faith in the truth npon whi(}h she 
may decide in the futnre. 

The same happens in every organized so- 
ciety. The Constitution of a State is, for 
various reasons, open to many disputes, which 
circumstances evolve. When there are two 
contradictory views presented, one or the other 
must necessarily be false, yet so long as no real 
danger is threatened to the State from the 
misinterpretation, the supreme tribimal may 
suspend its decision in the case. Meanwhile 
both parties remain loyal, and faithful citizens, 
so long as they are willing to abide by the de- 
cision which future circumstances may make 
it obligatory on the court to pronounce. Eut 
the parties would forfeit their claim to loyalty, 
should they positively make up their minds 
not to submit to the decision, if given against 
them. 

This shows, that the Church, so far from en- 
slaving the intellect of her children, leaves 
them every possible freedom; and it is only 
when liberty degenerates into license, that it 
becomes her duty, as teacher and judge of the 
truth, to speak out, and to define her position. 

" But there are many sects in her own bosom : 
for instance, there are Galileans, who do not 
believe in the infallibility of the Pope; and 



236 THE KOMAN CATHOLIC CHTJECH, 

there are Ultramontanists, who vigorously con- 
tend for that infallibility. The Thomists are 
at war with the Molinists, and the Augustinians 
with both, on the subject of grace and free will 
in connection with grace. Then there are 
Franciscans who wear shoes, and others that 
do not. Some shave their heads, and others 
wear beards. Some dress in one way, and 
others in another." 

Although, as we have just said, there are 
different opinions among our divines concern- 
ing matters that relate to faith and morals, yet 
they all agree on the faith itself. Neither the 
Thomist, Jesuit, nor Augustinian, denies the de- 
fined faith of the Church concerning grace or 
free will. All they do is to discuss the man- 
ner in which grace, and free will, under the 
action of grace, operate in man. The manner 
of a thing differs from the substance of the 
thing. Whether the blood operates in one 
way or another on the heart, the lungs, the 
various parts of the human system, may be 
matter of antao:onistic views amons: doctors of 
medicine ; but, so long as they do not deny 
the existence of the blood, nor its action and 
influence on the human system, they cannot be 
said to err substantially on that subject. So 
it is with many questions of theology. The 



THE CHUECH OF CHRIST. 



237 



modus operandi^ the manner in whicli any 
mystery or article of faith is to be conceived, 
may cause differences of opinion among the 
learned, but they cannot be said to differ about 
the faith. As to the various religious orders 
which exist in the Church, and their different 
customs and costumes, every one, not wilfully 
blind easily perceives, that they have nothing 
to do with faith or morals. No one will deny, 
that a man who shaves his head or his beard — 
who dresses in gray or in white — may be as 
sound and as good a Christian as one who 
wears a beard, or dresses in blue or black. 
You might as well argue, that our citizens are 
divided in their loyalty to the Constitution, 
because some of them wear felt hats, others 
beavers, and others panamas ; or, because some 
take their dinner at noon, and others at five or 
six o'clock in the evening. 

In conclusion, let us sum up the reasons 
which should make every one seriously deter- 
mine on embracing the doctrines and practices 
of the Eoman Catholic Church, in preference 
to any other. 

First, Because without faith it is impossible 
to please God, or to be saved, and that saving 
faith can be found in the Eoman Catholic 
Church alone. 



238 THE EOMAN CATHOLIC CHIIKCH, 

Secondly, Because she alone has those essen- 
tial properties, which, according to the Script- 
ures and common sense, should characterize 
the Church of Christ. She alone has existed 
from the days of the Apostles. She alone is 
one in her faith, her sacraments, and her gov- 
ernment ; she alone is Cathohc, or universal ; 
she alone is holy and infallible ; she alone is 
indestructible. All other Churches have- had 
their day ; the Church of Eome has survived 
all the persecutions of earth, and of the powers 
of heU. She alone offers security in life, and 
at the hour of death. 

At the worst, our Protestant brethren admit, 
with Luther, that a good Catholic has as €air a 
chance of going to Heaven as a Protestant, or 
any honest man, consequently he loses nothing 
worth speaking of, by remaining a Catholic. 
That he gains much, those testify who have 
left the ranks of infidelity, indifferentism, 
scepticism, and Protestantism in its various 
forms, to join the one fold of the One Shep- 
herd. 

Let all those who read these pages pray that 
God may enlighten them, and pour out His 
Spirit upon them, that they may find the old 
path, and securely and faithfully walk therein, 
until they reach the happy goal where all are 



THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. 



239 



one, in the same undivided Godhead, for ever- 
more. Let all strive to enter that brave and 
long-tried bark, whose eventful history is thus 
summed up by the poet : 

Two thonsand years — ^two thousand years, 

Our bark o'er billowy seas 
Has onward kept her steady course, 

Through hurricane and breeze ; 
Her Captain was the Eisen One — 

She braved the stormy foe, 
And still He guides, who guided her— 

Two thousand years ago. 

" Sound Scripture and tradition were 

The charts, her course to steer ; 
Her Helmsman was the Holy One, 

A helper ever near. 
Though many a beauteous boat has sunk 

The treacherous waves below, 
Yet, ours is sound as she was built. 

Two thousand years ago. 

** The wind that filled her swelling sheet, 

From Rome's great centre blown, 
Still urging her unchanging course 

Through shoals and breakers on ; 
Her fluttering pennant still the Cross, 

Whatever breeze might blow, 
It pointed, as it does, to Heaven, 

Two thousand years ago. 



THE EOMAN CATHOLIC CHTJECH, 



" When first our gallant ship was launched^ 

Although our hands were few, 
Yet, dauntless was each bosom found, 

And every heart was true ; 
And still, though in their mighty hull 

Unnumbered bosoms glow, 
Her crew is faithful as it was 

Two thousand years ago. 

" True, some had left their noble craft, 

To sail the seas alone. 
And made them, in their hour of pride, 

A vessel of their own ; 
But they, when clouds portentous rise, 

And storms tempestuous blow. 
Re-entered that old vessel, built 

Two thousand years ago. 

" For, onward rides our gallant bark, 

"With all her canvas set. 
In some few nations still unknown 

To plant her standard yet. 
Her flag shall float where'er a breath 

From human life shall glow. 
And millions bless the boat that sailed 

Two thousand years ago. 

" On Britain's coast three centuries since, 

She lay almost a wreck. 
Her mainmast gone, her rigging torn. 

The boarders on her deck ; 
There Becket, Fisher, More, did fall, 

Queen Mary's blood did flow. 



THE CHURCH OF CHEIST. 

Defending onr good vessel, bnilt 
Two thousand years ago. 

" All ! manj a martyr's blood was shed, 

"We may not name them all ; 
They tore the peasant from his hut, 

The noble from his hall ; 
When, Erin brave, thy children's blood 

For faith did freely flow, 
As pure the stream as was the fount, 

Two thousand years ago. 

" Yet onward still our vessel pressed 

And weathered out the gale, 
She cleared the wreck and spliced the mast; 

And mended every sail : 
And swifter, staunch er, mightier far, 

Upon her cruise did go, 
Strong hands and gallant hearts had she 

Two thousand years ago. 

" True to that guiding star which led 

To Israel's cradled hope, 
Her steady needle pointeth yet 

To Calvary's bloody top ! 
Yes ! there she floats, that good old ship, 

From mast to keel below, 
Seaworthy still as erst she was 

Two thousand years ago. 

"Not unto us, not unto ns, ^ 
Be praise or glory given, 
But unto Him, who watch and ward 
Has kept for her in Heaven, 
21 



24-2 THE EOMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH, ETO 



Who quelled the whirlwind in his wrath, 

Bade tempest cease to blow, 
That Lord who launched our vessel forth 

Two thousand years ago. 

Then onward speed thee, brave old bark. 

Speed onward in thy pride, 
O'er sunny seas and billows dark, 

The Holy One thy guide ! 
And sacred be each plank and spar, 

Unchanged by friend or foe, 
Just as she left J erusalem 

thousand years a^." 



V. 



CONFESSION. 

" And he said to tliem again : Peace be to you. As tbe 
Father hath sent me, I also send you. "When he had said 
this, he breathed on them ; and he said to them : Receive 
ye the Holy Ghost. Whose sins ye shall forgive, they are 
forgiven them, and whose sins ye shall retain, they are re- 
tained.'' John, xx. 21, 22, 23. 

Mjln is a sinful creature. Ever since the 
fall, the wickedness of men has been great on 
earth, and all the thought of their heart has 
been bent on evil, at all times (Gen. vi. 5) ; 
"for the imagination and thought of man's 
heart are prone to evil from his youth." (Gen. 
viii. 21.) And St. John, the Evangelist, tells 
us that " all that is in the world is the concupi- 
scence of the flesh, and the concupiscence of 
the eyes, and the pride of life, which is not of 
the Father, but is of the world.'' (1 John, ii. 16.) 

This inclination to sin, this concupiscence, 
is universal. It exists in the just man, after 
his regeneration through baptism, as well as in 
the unregenerated pagan ; and through passion 



244 



CONFESSION. 



and temptation it leads tlie greater portion of 
mankind to rebel against their Maker, and 
transgress His Law. 

Now, tlie question isr Did Christ, the Foundei 
of Christianity, leave us any visible, palpable 
remedy against sin, — against all sin? Not 
only the sin of unbelief and transgressions of 
the moral law, committed before baptism, but 
also against all kinds of sin, which we may 
have the misfortune of committing after bap- 
tism ? Or, in other words : Did Christ leave 
to His ministering Church the power of par- 
doning sin committed after baptism ? And, if 
He left such power, is it a logical sequence, 
that those whose sins are to be forgiven should 
confess them to the ministers of His Church ? 

The questions are plain, and we hope to 
make the answers equally so. 

The better to imderstand the questions and 
the answers, allow us to premise certain truths, 
which most Christians admit, with the Eoman 
Catholic Church. 

The object of Christ's mission to the world 
was chiefly twofold. He came, first, to destroy 
error and to teach all truth. Secondly, to d( 
away with sin, and to establish the empire of 
virtue in its stead. These may be called the 
fundamental objects of Christ's coming, aud 



CONFESSION. 



245 



therefore, of Cliristianity, of tlie Chnrcli, as a 
divine institution. 

Both these objects He came to realize in a 
visible, palpable manner. These objects were 
to be the objects of Christianity as long as 
t would exist on earth. But, according to 
Christ's promises, Christianity was to exist till 
the end of time ; therefore these primary ob- 
jects remain to be realized by Christianity till 
this day, and till the end of time. And, if 
there is no evidence of a change in the original 
plan of their realization, they continue to be 
realized in a sensible, visible form — the very 
same as He established it from the beginning 
of Christianity. 

The first object, the destruction of error, and 
the teaching of all truth, together with the 
plan which Christ established for that purpose, 
we have fully discussed, in a previous lecture. 
We there proved, that He did not leave the 
knowledge of truth to the arbitration of the 
individual intellect, but established a living, 
an authoritative, an infallible tribunal, which 
should guide men into all truth, and free thena 
from all error opposed to the doctrines of sal- 
vation. 

Is it not natural to suppose, even before en- 
tering upon a Scriptural examination of the 

21* 



24:6 



CONFESSION. 



fact, that He adopted, with regard to the de- 
struction of sin, and the establishment of the 
empire of virtue in the heart, a method similar 
to that which He adopted to establish the 
reign of truth in the minds of men ? Did He 
leave the manner of atoning for sin- the man- 
ner of getting rid of it — to the arbitrary will 
of every individual sinner ? Did He leave the 
judgment of the validity or invalidity of the 
conditions and dispositions for efficacious re- 
pentance, to the same arbitrary will of each 
sinner? Or, did He not appoint a ministry 
with power at once to take cognizance of the 
sins committed, of the conditions and dispo- 
sitions of true repentance, and invest them with 
the power to apply, or to retain the pardon, for 
for those sins ? 

Om' separated brethren contend for the 
former, we for the latter, as the true method 
established by the Founder of Christianity , 

We proceed to prove the truth of our doc- 
trine : that Christ gave to His Apostles the full 
and exclusive power of ibrgiving and retaining 
whatsoever sins might be committed by men 
after baptism. This He did, when, having 
laid down, as a last resource, to convert an of- 
fending brother, that they should tell the 
Church, He enjoined, that if he would not 



CONFESSION. 



247 



hear tlie Clmrclij they should let him be to 
them as the heathen and publican. (Matt, xviii. 
17.) And He added: "Amen, I say to you, 
whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be 
bound also in Heaven : and whatsoever you 
shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in 
Heaven." (Ibid. IS.) The power of binding and 
loosing supposes bonds — what bonds ? Surely 
not physical, but spiritual bonds. What are 
spiritual bonds, if not sins and the effects of 
sins ? Christ, then, conferred upon His Apos- 
tles, upon the first ministers of His Church, the 
twofold power of binding and loosing whatso- 
ever sins might be brought under the action of 
their judicial power, and, promised, in a most 
solemn manner, that the power thus exer- 
cised by them, on earth, would be ratified in 
Heaven. 

After He has made the general atonement 
for sin, by his bloody death upon the ignomin- 
ious cross ; after He has triumphed over death 
— which is the wages of sin — our Divine Re- 
deemer, by His glorious resurrection, before 
retmTiing to His Heavenly Father, speaks to 
tliem again, and, if possible, in still clearer 
terms, upon this subject. Observe, that the 
ransom for all sin had now been paid to an of- 
fended Deity ; the reconciliation, through the 



248 



COKFESSION. 



Mediator's deatli, of sinful man with his God, 
had been effected ; the price was paid and ac- 
cepted, but the conditions of the acceptance 
remained to be fulfilled according to the plan 
of Divine Providence. The merits of the re- 
deeming blood were to be applied to the souls 
of those for whom it had been shed. This 
must be done according to the method intended 
by the Mediator and His Heavenly Father. 

What is that method ? Is it, that every sin- 
ner shall, by faith and hope, by repentance and 
sorrow, apply this blood himself, and be the 
judge of the conditions and personal dispo- 
sitions required in the application? We an- 
swer: By no means. The Eedeemer willed 
that these merits of His redeeming blood 
should come to sinful man through the visible, 
external channel, the sacrament of penance, 
which He instituted for that purpose, and that 
His Apostles and their successors should be 
the dispensers of this wholesome remedy, the 
judges of the dispositions with which it was to 
be received by the applicants. 

" Now when it was late that same day, being 
the first day of the week, and the doors were 
shut, where the disciples were gathered to- 
gether for fear of the Jews, Jesus came, and 
stood in the midst, and said to them : Peace be 



OOIi^FESSION. 



249 



to you ... As the Father hath sent Me, I 
also send yon. 

"When He had said this, He breathed on them 
and He said to them : Eeceive ye the Holy Ghost 

" Whose sins ye shall forgive, they are for- 
given them : and whose sins yon shall retain 
they are retained.^' (John, xx. 19, 21, 22, 23.) 

The Protestant version here reads : " Whose- 
soever sins ye remit, they are remitted nnto 
them ; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are 
retained." 

To remit and to forgive sins, mean the same 
thing; the only difference is that the word 
" remit " is derived from the Latin, whereas 
to " forgive " is a native word of onr multiform 
lanecuao-e. 

Let us analyze the meaning of the passage : 
" Peace be to you." How fitting a salutation 
to those disciples of His whom He was about 
to make His ministers of peace and recon- 
ciliation ! 

"As the Father hath sent Me, I also send 
you." Eecall the nature and object of Christ's 
mission to a fallen world, — to do away with all 
error and sin, and to estabhsh the Eongdom o 
truth and virtue in the^minds and hearts of all 
men. With what power? With all power; 
for " all power was given to Him in Heaven 



250 



COOTESSION. 



and on eartli." Witli diyine power; for 
Christ came to ns with the fulness of the power 
of God. 

Next : " He breathed upon them." Why 
this peculiar ceremony ? When our separate^ 
brethren assist at the Catholic baptism, and see 
among other rites, the priest breathing upon 
the person to be baptized, they not nnfreqnently 
smile, and whisper into each other's ears : "Look 
at the old priest blowing in his face." I won- 
der whether these same brethren would have 
smiled at Jesus, breathing upon His Apostles. 
But to the point : 

"Eeceive the Holy Ghost." "Who is the 
Holy Ghost ? The third person of the ever 
blessed and adorable Trinity, consubstantial 
with the Father and the Son, one in nature, 
distinct in person, to w^hom, in an especial 
manner, belongs the work of sanctifying the 
souls of men by the infusion of divine grace, 
purchased for us by the blood of the Ee- 
deemer. 

"Why all these imposing and significant pre- 
ludes ? Why say to them, " Peace be to you . . . 
As the Father hath sent Me, I also send you ? " 
Why this solemn breathing upon the disciples ? 
Why this imparting of the Holy Ghost ? Christ 
neither says nor does a thing uselessly. There 



CONFESSION. 



must be something grand, to follow such im- 
pressive preparations. Listen, and understand 
the object : Whose sins you shall forgive, 
they are forgiven them ; whose sins you shall 
retain, they are retained." 

The words are plain, they need no elaborate 
comment : " Whose sins," or as the Protestant 
version reads, " whosesoever sins, you shall for- 
give " (remit). The proposition is universal in 
all its parts. There is question of forgiving 
sins J all sins, without restriction, whosesoever 
sins ; no persons are excepted. The power of , 
pardoning sins is to be exercised by the Apos- r wM.v 
ties, with regard to all persons whatsoever, -^^'^ 
who are the subjects of that power. The same 
reasoning applies to the other part of the text. 
Whose sins you shall retain, they are retained. 
He confers a double power, therefore, upon 
His Apostles, and promises to ratify its exer- 
cise by them. 

Furthermore, these Apostles are men / they 
are not angels; much less, Gods. As men, 
therefore, having a human nature, they are 
clothed with this divine power of forgiving 
and retaining whosesoever sins. 

Nothing can be plainer, than the fact that 
the power of binding and loosing, of remitting 
and retaining sins, was by these words, and on 



252 



CONFESSION. 



this particular occasion, entrusted by the Foun- 
der of Christianity to His disciples. 

But not to them only. The mission of Chris- 
tianity was intended to be perpetual ; coexten- 
sive with time. Hence the objects of the mis 
sion are of their nature coextensive with time 
Hence, the ministry which is empowered tc 
effect those objects, is destined to be perpetual 
till the end of time. As there will always be 
error to be refuted and condemned, so there 
will always be sin to be forgiven or retained. 
The ministry, therefore, of reconciliation is not 
to cease with the death of those who first exer- 
cised the power. It is a moral body whose 
members shall never cease to succeed each 
other till the objects of its mission cease to 
exist. 

The identity of the mission requires a corres- 
ponding identity of the powers devolving suc- 
cessively upon the delegates of those powers. 
There must be, therefore, at this day, a minis- 
try which claims and exercises, in behalf of sin- 
ners, the same powers that Christ conferred 
upon the first recipients of those powers, His 
beloved Apostles. 

Where is that ministry? "Not among our 
separated brethren, nor in any of the so-called 
Protestant Churches. For all of them, even 



CONFESSION. 



253 



those who claim tlie power of forgiving and 
retaining sins, in their printed confessions of 
faith, or liturgical mamials, reject it in their 
teaching and in their practice; or if any do 
claim and exercise that power, they do so to 
the great indignation of the rest of their breth- 
ren, and have innovated upon the universal 
doctrine and practice of Protestantism during 
the last two centuries. 

Where, then, is that ministry! Evidently 
nowhere, in its perpetuity, in its uninterrupted 
and uniform manner of belief and practice 
on this score, except in the Roman Catholic 
Church. The Koman Catholic Church, then, 
proves herself the Church of Christ, by the 
fact that she has always claimed and exercised 
the power of forgiving and retaining sins, 
which Christ conferred upon His disciples, and 
which, according to the very object of that 
power, was to be claimed and exercised by the 
successors of those disciples till the end of time, 
while those so-called Christian Churches, 
which discard this power, thereby prove them- 
selves no longer in union with the Church 
of Christ, which has always believed remission 
of sins an article of the Christian faith. What 
is the great objection urged by our separated 
brethern agamst this doctrine? That it is a 



254 



C0NFE6SI0N. 



presumptuous assumption of power which bo- 
longs to God alone. " Who," say they, " who 
can forgive sins but God only ?" This is no 
new objection to this article of Christian faith. 
Do you know, dear reader, who were the first 
to urge this objection, and how, and by whom 
it was refuted ? Open your New Testament, 
and read the beginning of the second chapter 
of St. Mark's Gospel. We are told by the 
Evangelist that when Jesus was again in Ca- 
pharnaum, they brought to him one who was 
sick of the palsy; and when with much labor 
the bearers had succeeded in placing him at 
the feet of Jesus, "He saith to the sick of 
the palsy, Son, thy sins are forgiven thee." 
Then the historian proceeds: "And some of 
the scribes were sitting there, and thinking 
in their hearts. Why doth this man speak thus ? 
He blasphemeth. Who can forgive sins but 
God only." (Mark, ii. 5, 6, Y.) You observe 
the objection is precisely the same as that of 
our separated brethren. It is made by the 
scribes, that is to say, the sworn enemies of our 
Lord, and of the truth, who never rested till, 
by calumny and persecution, they succeeded in 
having Jesus put out of the way and nailed to 
the cross. They denied the divinity of Jesus, 
and therefore thought Him a mere man. And 



CONFESSION. 



255 



yet they heard Hjm say, " Thy sins are forgiven 
thee." This they considered blasphemy, be 
cause they did not believe it possible that 
could have such power given him. How does 
incarnate wisdom answer, and refute their ob- 
•»ection? Read on: "And Jesus presently, 
knowing in His spirit that they so thought with- 
in themselves, saith to them : Why think you so 
in your hearts ? which is easier to say to the sick 
of the palsy : Thy sins are forgiven thee, or to 
say. Arise, take up thy bed and walk ? But 
that you may know that the Son of man hath 
power on earth to forgive sins (He saith to the 
sick of the palsy), I say to thee. Arise ! take 
up thy bed and go into thy house. And imme- 
diately he arose, and, taking up his bed, went 
his way." (Ibid. 8-12.) Our Saviour then 
answers their objection in the very sense in 
which they made it. He proves to them and 
confinns his proof by a miracle, that it is 
possible, yea a fact, that the Son of man ^ not 
the Son of God as such only, but the Son of 
man hath power, not in heaven, but on earth ; 
here among men, to forgive sins ; and by that , 
same miracle He proved, once for all, that the 
same power may be possessed by other men, 
not indeed through condignity of nature, but 
by delegation of power. The power of for- 



256 



CONFESSION. 



giving sins is not so absolutely God's own tliat 
He cannot commnnicate it to His creatures. 
"We delegate certain powers to each other, 
which as to its legitimate exercise, do not lie 
in our individual natures as such. We by our 
suffrages elect a governor of State, who, in 
his oflScial character, can pardon crimes against 
the State and reprieve the culprit, though we, 
as individual citizens, have not the power of 
life and death. No priest pretends to have the 
power of forgiving and retaining sins in virtue 
of his bu'th, parentage, talents, genius, or edu- 
cation. He claims it in virtue of a commission 
granted him by the authorized depositaries of 
this power, namely St. Peter and the Apos- 
tles, and their legitimate successors, who re- 
ceived it from Christ, as He in His human 
natm^e, received all power from God. The 
only question to be settled is the question of 
fact: Did Jesus Christ give such power to 
men ? — 'to His ministers, to His Apostles ? This 
fact we have settled by an appeal to the ^^rip- 
ture, and it decides the matter beyond all dis- 
pute. 

This fact, some of the strongest enemies of 
the Church have candidly acknowledged to be 
beyond all reasonable controversy, 

Chillingworthj commenting on the text from 



COOTESSION. 



257 



St. John, ch. xx., writes : " Can any man be 

so unreasonable, as to imagine, that, wlien onr 
Saviour, in so solemn a manner, having first 
breathed upon His disciples, thereby conveying 
and insinuating the Holy Ghost in their hearts 
renewed unto them, or rather confirmed that 
glorious commission, etc., whereby He dele- 
gated to them an authority of binding and 
loosing sins upon earth . . . can any one think, 
I say, so unworthy of our Saviour, as to esteem 
those words of His for no better than compli- 
ment ? Therefore, in obedience to His gracious 
will, and as I am warranted and enjoined by 
my Holy Mother the Church of England, I be- 
seech you that by your practice and uses you 
will not suffer that commission, which Christ 
hath given to His ministers, to be a vain form 
of words, without any sense under them. When 
you find yourselves charged and oppressed, 
. . . have recourse to your spiritual physician, 
and freely disclose the malignancy of your 
diseasp . . . And come not to him, only with 
such a mind as you would go to a learned man, 
as one that can speak comfortable things to 
you ; but as to one that hath authority^ dele 
gated to him from God Himself^ to absolve 
and acquit you of your sins. (Serm. vii. Eeli- 
gion of Prot., pp.408, 409, apud Milner, Let. xli.) 

22* 



258 CONFESSIOK, 

But there are authorities that are more 
venerable and significant than that just cited 
from the champion of Protestantism. 

Luther, in his little catechism, requires his 
own to believe : " that the forgiveness of the 
priest is the forgiveness of God ; " and the 
Lutherans, according to Dr. Milner (Letter xli.), 
in their Confession of Faith and Apology for that 
confession, expressly teach that partiGular cib- 
solution is to be retained in confession, that to 
reject it is the error of the Novatian heretics ; 
and that by the power of the Keys (Matt. xvi. 
19), sins are remitted not only in the sight of 
the Church, but also in the sight of God 
(Augsb. Conf., art. xi., xii., xiii. ; Apol.) 

In the book of Common Prayer of the Church 
of England we find this ordinance for the 
minister who visits any sick person : " The 
latter should be moved to make especial con- 
fession of his sins, if he feels his conscience 
troubled with any weighty matter ; after which 
confession the priest shall absolve him, if he 
humbly and heartily desire it, after this sort : 
Our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath left power to 
His Church to absolve all sinners who truly 
j repent, and believe in Him, of His great mercy 
I forgive thee thine offences, and ly Sis an- 
\ thority committed to me^ I absoJ/ce thee from 



CONFESSION. 



259 



all thy sinSj in the name of tlie Father, and of 
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen." 
(Order for the Visitation of the Sick.) 

According to these authorities, there is then 
an absolving power in Christ's Church, which, 
in certain cases, at least, can and should be 
exercised by the ministers in whom it is lodged. 
If in one case, why not in all, since Christ 
made no distinction ? If in sickness, why not 
in health, should the sinner need and apply for 
the exercise of that power ? 

But if Christ did really leave power to His 
ministering Church to forgive and retain sins, 
it follows that the confession of sins is a neces- 
sary condition of the exercise of that power. 
The power is of a twofold character ; to for- 
give^ and to retain. There are instances, there- 
fore, in which the minister of this Sacrament 
is obliged to forgive, and others in which 
justice and prudence, or both, require him to 
postpone, or even absolutely refuse the pardon 
of offences. This power, consequently, is dis- 
cretionary and judicial. He is obliged to form 
an equitable judgment concerning the case 
which is brought before his tribunal. Woe to 
him if he abuses his power ! "Woe, if he uses it 
rashly and without justice ! The responsibility 
rests on his own conscience. 



260 



COOTESSION. 



But to form and exercise an equitable judg- 
ment, lie must needs know the matter on whicli 
lie is to decide. What would you think of a 
judge of one of our courts, who, without any 
examination of the accused, without any self- 
accusation on the part of the defendant, would 
take his seat, and pronounce sentence upon 
him? Suppose he should address the prisoners 
at the bar, in this way : "A, such a one, guilty, 
and condemned to ten years of penitentiary. 

B, not guilty, go home and join your family. 

C, guilty, and condemned to death." "Would 
not such a judge deserve your condemnation ! 

Make application of this case to the priest. 
Suppose he should, without any clear and 
distinct knowledge of the conscience of each 
penitent, pronounce sentence of absolution over 
some, and sentence of condemnation over 
others ; would he not expose himself to com- 
mit the grossest injustice to many of the sin- 
ners, who stand before his bar ? Perhaps the 
very individual to whom he should refuse for- 
giveness, is the one whom he absolves, and 
vice versa. 

He must, therefore, possess full knowledge 
of the cause on which he is to exercise his 
judgment. But this knowledge is possible on 
one of the two following suppositions only. 



CONCESSION. 



261 



Either God, who gives His minister the t-vrofold 
power, reveals to him in every instance the 
guilt, and the nature of the guilt, of the peni- 
tent ; or the penitent himself must become his 
own accuser. Now, we know that the ordi 
nary providence of God has not established 
the former of these means, as the usual chan- 
nel by which the minister of the sacrament 
of penance can come to the knowledge of the 
guilt of his penitents ; it follows, therefore, that 
the self-accusation of the guilty parties is the 
method which He established for that purpose. 
But what is this self-accusation except confes- 
sion ? The necessity of confession is therefore a 
logical conclusion, drawn from the divinely 
revealed proposition : that Christ left to His 
Church the power of forgiving and retaining 
" whosesoever sins." 

Nor, let it be said, that a general knowledge 
of man's sinfulness, on the part of the minister, 
or a general accusation of that sinfulness, on 
the part of the penitent, is sufficient to the 
discreet and just exercise of that power. For 
it must be remembered that sin is a violation 
or transgression of the law, and that these 
violations are, of their own nature, specifically 
and numerically different. There are different 
kinds of sins, and these different kinds may bo 



363 



OOOTESSION. 



commifted repeatedly. The mere knowledge 
of tlie general sinfulness of mankind, or the 
general self-accusation, on the part of the pen- 
itent, would, by no means, lead the spiritual 
judge into anything like a knowledge of the 
sinner's real claims to pardon, or his unworthi 
ness therefor. Unbelief, for instance, differs 
specifically from superstition ; blasphemy from 
cursing. All manslaughter is not murder, nor 
is all manslaughter criminal to the same de- 
gree. Fornication and adultery constitute two 
distinct and specific crimes. 

Furthermore, a judge who has the power to 
pardon and retain must take cognizance of the 
moral dispositions of his penitents. Are they 
really sorry ? Are they resolved to amend, to 
avoid the occasions of sin ? Have they made 
restitution, or are they willing to repair the 
damage which their sins may have caused to a 
second or a third party ? All these are dispo- 
sitions, the presence or absence of which, in the 
heart of the guilty party, will influence and 
determine the judge in the judgment which 
he is to pronoimce. But all these lie hidden 
in the heart, and cannot be known unless tlie 
penitent himself reveal them to the confessor. 

Suppose a penitent should come to me, and 
say, " Father, I am a great sinner, and I crave 



OOKFESSION. 



263 



the benefit of your pardoning ministry in my 
belialf," and I slionld, without more ado, say to 
him, " Well, my child, I absolve thee of all thy 
sins, in the name of the Father, and of the 
Son, and of the Holy Ghost," and suppose you 
know that said penitent swindled you out of 
ten thousand dollars, and is well able to restore 
them, would you deem my absolution such as 
Christ intended I should impart in the given 
instance ? Why not, if the general knowledge 
of man's sinfulness, or the general self-accusa- 
tion of the sinner, is all that Christ required 
ot the penitent ? 

It is evident, therefore, from these reflections, 
that as soon as you admit the fact, that there is 
a judicial power to forgive and retain sins, you 
must admit the duty of confession by the peni- 
tent, as a consequence of that power. There- 
fore, He who willed the pardoning power, also 
willed confession, as a condition necessary to 
execution. Hence the command of St. James 
(v. 16), " Confess, therefore, your sins one to 
another." He had previously said : " Is any 
one sick among you, let him bring in the 
priests of the Church, and let them pray over 
him, anointing him with oil in the name of 
the Lord." Whereupon he concludes : " Con- 
fess, therefore^ your sins one to another." The 



264 



CONFESSION. 



confession is to be made to tliose brought in to 
the sick man ; to those who are to anoint him; 
to those who are to pray for him ; but these are 
the priests. The confession of sins is made with 
a view to their remission, but, as already proved, 
none but the lawfully appointed ministers of the 
Church have the power of remitting sins ; there- 
fore, the confession here enjoined must be made 
to them. 

It was thus that the primitive Christians un- 
derstood the doctrine of Christ and of the 
Apostles. For we are told (Acts, xix. 18), that 
" many of them that believed came, confessing 
and declaring their deeds." Observe, it was 
not the unbelievers, it was they who helieved 
that made the confession and declaration of 
their deeds. And the fruit of their confession 
was made manifest by the fact, " that many of 
them who had followed curious arts, brought 
together their books and burned them before 
all." (Ibid., 19.) 

This practice we observe throughout the ages. 

St. tenasus mentions some women w^ho ac- 
cused themselves of secret crimes : " Some," 
says he, " touched in conscience, publicly con 
fessed theu^ sins, while others, in despair, re- 
nounced their faith.". (Adv. Her., xiii.) 

On this passage Cardinal Wiseman re- 



CONFESSION. 



265 



marks : " Look at this alternatiye ; some con- 
fessed, and others renounced the faith. If 
there had been any other means of forgiveness, 
why should they have abandoned their faith ?" 
(Moorfield Lect., 2d ser., p. 23.) 

Tertullian inculcates the same doctrine, and 
urges the same alternative : " If you still draw 
back, let your mind turn to that eternal fire, 
which confession will extinguish ; and that you 
may not hesitate to adopt the remedy, weigh 
the greatness of future punishment. And, as 
you are not ignorant, that, against that fire, 
after the baptismal institution, the aid of con- 
fession has been appointed, why are you an 
enemy to your own salvation ?" (De Poenit., 
c. xii.) 

St. Cyprian tells us, that those who enter- 
tained the mere inward thought of sacrificing 
to idols or of surrendering the Scriptures, 
" confessed this sin, with grief, and without 
disguise, S^/br^ the priests of God, unburdening 
their conscience, and seeking a salutary remedy, 
however small and pardonable their failing 
may have been." (De Lapsis, p. 190.) 

Here you have confession " lefore the joriests^^ 

with the fall conviction, that it is from the 

priests of God they are to expect the salutary 

remedy, namely, the remission of their sins. 
23 



266 



CONFESSION. 



In anotlier place he^jwrites : " I entreat yon, 
my brethren, let all confess their fanlts, while 
he that has offended enjoys life ; while his con- 
fession can be received, and while the satisfac- 
tion and pardon imparted by the priests are 
acceptable before God." (Ibid., p. 190.) 

The satisfaction and pardon imparted by the 
priests of the Chnrch were, therefore, deemed 
the satisfaction and pardon of God, since they 
are said to be acceptable before God. 

Origen, a Greek Father, says : " They who 
have sinned, if they hide and retain their sin 
within their breast, are grievously tormented ; 
but if the sinner become his own accuser, 
while he does this, he discharges the cause 
of his malady. Only let him carefully con- 
sider to whom he should confess his sin ; what 
is the character of the physician ; if he be one 
who will be weak with the weak ; who will 
weep with the sorrowful, and who understands 
the discipline of condolence and fellow-feeling, 
so that when his skill shall be known, and his 
pity felt, you may follow what he shall advise. 
Should he think your disease to be such that 
it should be declared in the assembly of 
the faithful,— whereby others may be edified, 
and yourself easily reformed, — this must be 
done with much deliberation, and the skilful 



GONFESSIOISr. 



267 



advice of the physician." (Homil. ii., in Psal. 
xxxyii.) 

According to Origen, private^ or auricular 
confession^ always preceded public confession, 
and it depended on the advice of the physician 
in private, whether the penitent should mak'e 
the same confession in public. 

Again, this learned Father says : " They who 
are not holy die in their sins ; the holy do pen- 
ance ; they feel their wounds ; are sensible ot 
their failings; look for the priest^ implore 
health; and through him^ seek to he j^urifiedP 
(Homil. X., in Num.) " If we discover our sins, 
not only to God, but to those who may apply a 
remedy to our wounds and iniquities, our sins 
will be effaced by Him who said: have 
blotted out thy iniquities as a cloud, and thy 
sins as a mist.' " (Is. xliv. 22 ; Homil. xvii., 
in Luc.) 

Confession to God alone, is, according to Or- 
igen, not sufficient ; to be purified and to have 
onr sins effaced by Almighty God, we must, 
moreover, look to the priest for that purpose. 

St. Basil teaches that we must not rashly 
communicate our sins to everybody, but that 
" the confession of sins must be made to such 
persons as have power to apply a remedy." 
(In Eegul. brev. Qussst. ccxxix., torn, ii.) 



268 



CONFESSIOK. 



" ITecessarily our sins mnst be confessed to 
those to whom has been committed the dispen- 
sation of the mysteries of God." (In Eegiil. 
brev. Qnsest. cclxxxviii.) 

St. Ephrem of Edessa, in his work on the 
Priesthood, writes : " The exalted dignity of the 
priesthood is far above our understanding and 
the power of speech. The remission of sins is 
not granted to mortals^ but through the minis- 
try of the priest." 

St. Pacianns, refuting the objections of the 
ISToYatians, repeated by our separated brethren 
in our day, says, " But God alone, you JSToyatians 
will say, can grant the pardon of sins. That 
is true ; but what He does by His ministers, is 
done by His own power. What did He say to 
His Apostles ? ' What you shall hind on earth 
shall he hound in heaven; and what you shall 
loose on earth shall he loosed in heaven.'^ And 
why this, if sinners might be bound only and 
not loosed ?" He then continues and refutes 
another objection, which our separated breth- 
ren have borrowed from their Novatian ances- 
tors of the fourth century. " But," says he, 
"perhaps the Apostles alone had this power? 
Then they alone, it must be said, had power to 
baptize, to confer the Holy Spirit, and to purify 
the Gentiles &om their sins ; for in the same 



CONFESSIOI^. 



269 



place Trhere He gives them power to administer 
the sacrament of baptism, He also gives them the 
power to loose sinners. Either, then, these two 
powers were peculiarly reserved to the Apostles, 
or they are both continued to their successors ; 
and, therefore, since it is certain that the power 
of baptism and unction is descended to the 
bishops, to them has likewise come the power 
of binding and loosing." (Ep. i., ad Sympron.) 

The same Father, in another letter, refuting 
the Novatian error that the Church cannot ad- 
mit sinners to penance after baptism, because 
she cannot forgive mortal sins, asks: "Who 
is it that proposes this doctrine ? Is it Moses, 
or Paul, or Christ ? No, it is JSTovatian ! And 
who is this Novatian ? Is he a man pure and 
blameless who has forsaken the Church ; who 
was lawfully ordained bishop, and, in the ordi- 
nary course, succeeded in the place of a bishop 
deceased ? What do you mean, you will tell 
me ? It suffices that he has thus taught. But 
when did he thus teach ? Was it immediately 
after the Passion of Christ ? No, it was nearly 
three hundred years after that event. But did 
this man follow the prophets? Was he a 
prophet? Did he raise the dead? Did he 
work miracles ? Did he speak various tongues ? 
For, to establish a new Gospel, he should have 

23* 



270 



COOTESSTOK. 



done some of these things ; and thongli lie had, 
yet the Apostle assures ns, that should an angel 
from heaven joreach another Gospel^ let him 
le anathema. (Gal. i. 8.) Has no one, from 
the coming of Christ to Novatian, understood 
the Christian doctrine ? And since that time 
is he alone in the way of salvation ? But, you 
add, "we do not acquiesce in authority, we 
make use of reason. As to me, then, who 
hitherto have been satisfied with the authority 
and tradition of the Church, I will not now 
dissent from it ; I will not seek after disputes ; 
and you who have separated from this body, 
and divided from your mother, search in books 
for what is most hidden, that you may disturb 
those who are at rest. It is not we, but you, 
who have raised this dispute." (Epist. iii.) 

Who does not see with what overwhelming 
effect the same argument tells upon those 
authors of the so-called Reformation, who 
adopted this particular error of the Novatians ! 
"Whatever may be said of the authority of 
tradition on matters of doctrine and faith, this 
much must be conceded by our separated 
friends : that its history bears stubborn evidence 
to the fact, that the Church has always be- 
lieved the doctrine and practice of confession 
to be the doctrine of Christ, and His Apostles, 



CONFESSION. 



271 



and that every departure from that doctrine 
and its practice is, in so mucli, a departure 
from the truth of Christianity. 

We now come to the leading objections 
which our adversaries are accustomed to urge 
against confession. They are differently put 
by different writers and antagonists, but the 
substance is throughout the same. 

The first among these objections is of a prac- 
tical nature. When our friends hear the word 
confession, a thrill comes over their nerves, a 
panic seizes their hearts. " What ! go to con- 
fession ? Never ! It is too hard for any men 
or women to go and tell all their sins, aye and 
their very thoughts and most hidden desires, to 
a fellow-mortal ; to a man like themselves." 

Grant that it is hard, to poor human nature, 
to declare its hidden weaknesses and secret 
miseries to a fellow creature; does it follow 
thence that there is no divine command to do 
so ? The inference seems very illogical, indeed. 
Tour reasoning, thrown into its proper logical 
form, would read thus : Whatever is hard to 
flesh and blood cannot be instituted by Jesus 
Chi^ist ; bat to confess one's sins is hard to flesh 
and blood; therefore, confession was never 
instituted by Jesus Christ. The fault of your 
reasoning lies in the principle which you as- 



272 



COJSTTESSIOK-. 



sume. Is it really true that Jesus Christ could 
not institute anything that would cause some 
pain or hardship to man's fallen nature ? If 
SO5 then you will be obliged to reject most of 
those moral doctrines which you have hitherto 
believed. Thus, for instance, is it not hard for 
human nature to deny itself, to take up its 
cross daily, to be slandered, persecuted even 
unto death, for justice' sake? — yet all these 
things were to be done and endured by the 
disciples of Him, whose life was a perpetual 
cross and martyrdom. 

Is not sin the greatest evil of God and man? 
"What more natural than that, to get rid of it, 
to have it healed, man should be obliged to 
undergo some humiliation and hardship ? 
When there is question of recovering the health 
of our corruptible bodies, we submit ourselves 
to the judgment and treatment of temporal 
physicians ; we declare, in detail, the symptoms 
of the most private and shameful diseases ; and 
why should we demur against the obligation 
of manifesting to our spiritual physicians the 
maladies of our immortal souls, that they may 
be saved from everlasting death ? 

Where is the felon, the criminal of State, 
who, having deserved death, would not be wil- 
ling, in order to save his temporal life, to ao* 



COISTFESSION. 



273 



knowledge in Ml to the minister of State tlie 
crimes of whicli he has been guilty ? And why 
should we deem it hard to confess our sins to 
the ministers of God, in order to free oar souls 
from eternal destruction ? 

But your objection, kind reader, suggests a 
new and unanswerable proof of the divinity of 
the institution which it assails. 

If it is true, as Calvin says, that confession 
is a rack, a torture applied by the priests of 
Rome, to the consciences of men, how comes it 
that so many millions of men and women have, 
in all ages and countries, submitted so wil- 
lingly, so readily to this torture? "Why did 
they not rise up against the tyrants who 
stretched them out on that moral rack ? And 
not only the ignorant, the vulgar crowd, but 
the learned, the geniuses of the world, have 
subjected themselves to this so-called torture. 
Emperors and empresses, kings and queens, 
eminent judges and skilful lawyers, magistrates^ 
military chieftains, statesmen, philosophers^ 
orators, poets, artists, have submitted and still 
submit to this painful ordeal. Our Gastons 
and Taneys on the bench of the Supreme Court 
of their country, our Ives, Heckers, Walworths, 
Bakers, go to confession as well as our poor 
hod-carriers and navvies. How will you ae- 



274 



CONFESSION. 



count for this fact, on your principle that Christ 
could not require confession of sins to a priest, 
because it is too humiliating to our manhood? 
Tou cannot accoimt for this fact, except on the 
principle that all these millions were and are 
convinced, in their inmost mind, and on the 
most irresistible evidence, that it is an obli- 
gation, a duty enjoined by the Founder of 
Christianity on all sinners, who wish to be re- 
conciled with His Heavenly Father. And is 
it probable that a conviction so universal, so 
lasting, should be the result of sheer falsehood 
in principle, or of sophistry in its application ! 

We can understand, that people will adopt 
false views, and follow erroneous practices, on 
subjects which flatter human pride and human 
passions ; which second the evil propensities 
of our fallen nature ; but we cannot conceive 
it possible that any very considerable number 
of people, spread over different regions of the 
world, born with different ideas, educated in 
different prejudices, should conspire, and con- 
tinue to conspire, in obliging themselves to the 
performance of certain painful duties — which, 
as yom- objection says, are too hard on poor 
human nature, too humiliating to their man- 
hood — ^without a well grounded conviction that 
it is an obligation imposed upon them by the 



COKFESSION. 



275 



Author of their faith. The more you exagge- 
rate the difficulties of confession, the more 
clearly you prove its divinity ; if, notwith- 
standing those difficulties, it is practised by the 
greater number of Christians. 

" But, I would not kneel and confess to a 
man, Avho has no other claim over me than his 
humanity." 

Neither do we, Catholics, kneel and con- 
fess to man as man only. We recognize, in 
the priest, the ambassador of God, the dis- 
penser of the heavenly mysteries, the minister 
of reconciliation. We look upon our father- 
confessor as St. Paul desu'ed the Corinthians to 
look upon himself, when he wrote : " For, what 
I forgave, if I have forgiven anything, for your 
sakes have I done it, in the person of Christ " 
(2 Cor. ii. 10) : and again, " We are, therefore, 
ambassadors for Christ; God, as it were, exhort- 
ing by us. For Christ, we beseech you, be ye 
reconciled to God." (2 Cor. v. 20.) 

" But is not confession the invention of the 
Pope, the bishops and the priests of the Eoman 
Catholic Church, who, in order to make money 
and enrich themselves, laid this burden upon 
their benighted people ?" 

A remarkable invention, indeed; perhaps, 
the most wonderful and astonishing that was 



276 coOTEssioiq-. 

ever made by man. And, who, pray, was its 
author ? "WTiat was Ms name ? In what cen- 
tury did he live ? Over what Church did he 
preside ? How did he manage to introduce 
this novelty into the Church ? Was it by dint 
of argument, or by the sword ? Was there no 
opposition to his invention? Did all the 
bishops, and priests, and people, agree with his 
new view, at once, or gradually ? Did they all 
go to bed, one night, without even the suspicion 
that confession might be a Christian duty, and 
wake, on the next morning, convinced that it 
was ? Where are the proofs of all, or any of 
these necessary suppositions in the case ? It is 
true, our adversaries have asserted the intro- 
duction of confession into the Church at a pe- 
riod later than Christ and His Apostles. But, 
have they proved it ? Are they agreed among 
themselves as to the period, and the author of 
its introduction? By no means. Let them, 
first, prove and agree among themselves, on 
this subject, and, then, we shall hear them 
again. Suffice it to have proved — from num- 
erous sources in the Primitive Church, that the 
practice of confession is as old as Christianity 
itself. 

Moreover, if popes, bishops, or priests, had 
invented confession, how came it that they did 



CONFESSION. 



277 



not exempt themselves from the liumiliating 
obligation ? How is it, that the hierarchy, the 
clergy of the Church, deem themselves bound 
to confess their sins, as well as the people? 
For you must know, that the ministers of this 
sacrament, from the sovereign pontiff down to 
the humblest priest, are conscientiously con- 
vinced, that they, no more than their spiritual 
subjects, can, ordinarily speaking, obtain the 
forgiveness of their sins, except by confession, 
and the absolution of one of their co-laborers 
in the ministry. 

As to the motive of sordid interest, alleged 
by oiu^ adversaries, we have little to say. It 
belongs to that class of objections which time 
and experience have proved to be the result, 
either of the grossest ignorance, or the most 
shameless propensity to slander our holy re- 
ligion. If the result of the former, it deserves 
to be pitied ; if of the latter, it merits sovereign 
contempt. To the ignorant we would answer, 
there is no more truth in the assertion, that 
priests make money by hearing confessions, 
than there is in the popular notion, which was 
rife, some years ago, in what are called the 
backwoods of the West, that Eoman Catholic 
priests, being the imps of the devil, had cloven 
feet, and that their foreheads were graced with 



278 



COISTFESSION. 



a pair of homs. If this reply is deemed insuf 
ficient to convince the ignorant or the preju- 
diced, allow ns to add, that since our missionary 
career began, a few years ago, we, together 
with our companions and assistant priests, 
have heard thousands of confessions, in nearly 
every city and town of any note in the West 
and East, and among them, the confessions of 
at least two thousand converts, from the various 
sects of Protestantism ; and we declare, that, if 
upon investigation, it shall be proved that 
any one of us ever asked for money, as a con- 
dition of absolution, we will hold ourselves 
ready to suffer the highest punishment the law 
can inflict. Why, the priest who would re- 
quire from his penitent money for his absolu- 
tion, would commit simony, a crime which 
would incapacitate him from exercising the 
functions of his sacred ministry ! 

So rigorous are the laws of the Chm^ch on 
this subject, that in some dioceses of the United 
States, the bishops have threatened with sus- 
pension those confessors who receive money, 
otherwise due to them, in the 'confessional, 
for fear of giving grounds of suspicion to the 
ignorant or the wicked among those outside 
the Church. On those who assert that confes- • 
sion is an invention of the Eoman Catholic 



C0NPESSI01!T. 



279 



priesthood, we would urge a few more common- 
sense reflections. 

"Would not those popes, bishops, and priests, 
have proved themselves madmen by instituting 
a practice which, while it is painful to the peo- 
ple, is a hundred times more so to themselves ? 
These men would have bound themselves to a 
labor, which, of all others, is the most wearing 
on the constitution, and, naturally speaking, 
the most disagreeable to the mind and heart. 
They would have doomed themselves, day after 
day,to the unwholesome task of being cooped 
up for hours in a narrow and ill-ventilated box, 
where the variety of noisome breaths and odors 
is outnumbered only by the variety of the loath- 
some crimes and vices, which are whispered 
into tlieu' ears. The only ministers of a sacra- 
ment so necessary to salvation, they would 
have obliged themselves to be ever ready to re- 
spond to the call of any wretched sinner, who 
might need the benefit of their services. And 
as none need the benefit of this sacrament more 
than the sick and dying, they would be bound 
to answer the farthest as well as the nearest, 
the most inconvenient as well as the easiest 
calls that would be made upon their charity. 
To sit by the bedside of the dying penitent, in 
the hospital, the asylum, and the pesthouse, 



280 



CONFESSIOIT. 



to breathe the fetid and often contagious atmos- 
phere of the bedroom, to walk or ride for miles, 
in all manner of seasons and weather; surely 
these were not the motives which could have in- 
duced them to invent an institution, the ardu- 
ous duties of which would naturally impair the 
health of their body, and perhaps endanger the 
salvation of their souls. As to the argument of 
indelicacy in having the pri-est's ears become the 
" common sewer" of the sins of his people, we 
have simply to say, that it proceeds rather from 
passion than from reason. Those same men 
who are so nice in their taste in the question 
of confessing revolting crimes to a priest, are, 
perhaps, the first to communicate the conta- 
gion of their infectious vices to their innocent 
and virtuous companions in the daily walks of 
life. Certain it is, that this boasted sense of 
propriety is not invoked as a reason for dis- 
carding the assistance of the physician or the 
surgeon, when diseases, often the physical con- 
sequences of the same moral crimes which 
constitute the sinner's burden of confession, 
are to be submitted to the treatment of medi- 
cine, or the scalpel of the operator. Nor is 
the same prudishness manifested, when the wit- 
ness at the bar of human justice is called upon 
to detail the minutest circumstances of the 



CONFESSION. 



281 



most revolting crimes. Our brethren shonld 
know tliat the confession of sins, a duty im- 
posed by the Christian law, is not a forced, but 
a voluntary act of the accuser ; and that no se- 
cret is drawn from the human breast, which 
the penitent is not only willing, but anxious to 
discover. 

Moreover, in the examination of his spiritual 
patient, the laws of theology require the priest 
to use all the delicacy of human prudence, that 
the keenest sensitiveness of a refined moral 
nature could possibly exact under the circum- 
stances. The penitent is his own accuser, and 
nothing but the necessity, springing from a 
well-grounded fear of the possible invalidity of 
the sacrament, if he should neglect to examine 
his spiritual child, will induce a discreet father- 
confessor to inquire any further into the nature 
and circumstances of the ofience committed. 
These are the real facts in the case ; all other 
statements are the exaggeration of men who 
are ignorant of the practical workings of the 
confessional, or declamations gotten up for the 
purpose of maligning an institution which 
none abhor more, than those who need it most. 

But is it not true that the practice of confes- 
sion, as existing in the Eoman Catholic Church, 
is an encouragement to sin and to the sinner ? 

24* 



282 CONFESSION. 

What more easy to a sinner than to convince 
himself that, all he has to do, to be shrived of 
his most enormous trespasses, is to go to his 
priest, confess them and get the absolution? 
Our brethren represent confession as made af- 
ter some such manner as the following. A sin 
ner, say a drunkard or blasphemer, goes to his 
priest ; tells him, " Father, I was drunk, I 
cursed, I swore." And the father-confessor 
says, "Well, my child, pay me five dollars. 
I absolve thee : In the name of the Father, and of 
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen. Go, 
my child, and sin for five or six months more !" 
That we do not misrepresent the views of our 
brethren, may be learned from almost any of 
their authors who have written on confession. 
Take, as a specimen, the following extract 
from a work entitled "Abominations of the 
Church of Eome," by the Eev. C. De Coetlo- 
gon : " In the Church of Eome, you may pur- 
chase, not only pardon for sins already com- 
mitted, but for those that shall be committed ; 
10 that any one may promise himself impunity 
upon paying the rate that is set upon any sin 
he hath a mind to commit. And so truly is 
Popery the mother of abominations, that, ii 
any one hath wherewithal to pay, he may not 
only be indulged in his present transgressions, 



COISTFESSION. 



283 



but may even be jpermitted to transgress for 
thefutureP (Page 13.) 

"We have already disposed of tlie calumny^ 
that Catholics pay for the pardon of their sins ; 
let ITS examine the question : Does the practice 
of confession encourage sin and the sinner ? To 
answer this objection, nothing more is neces- 
sary, than briefly to state the conditions which, 
besides confession proper, are required of every 
penitent for the pardon of his sins. Those 
conditions are, to say the least, as strict as any 
of our separated brethren do, or can require in 
their own system for the same purpose. These 
conditions are, contrition and satisfaction for 
our sins. "What is contrition ?" asks our cate- 
chism. Answer: " A hearty sorrow and detes- 
tation of the sins committed, with a firm pur- 
pose of amendment." " How many conditions 
must that sorrow have ?" " It must be sincere, 
universal, supernatural, and supreme or sov- 
ereign." 

The first condition, then, absolutely neces- 
sary to obtain the pardon of sin, is a true, a 
sincere, hearty sorrow for sins committed, with 
a firm purpose of amendment. What more 
do our adversaries require for the pardon of 
their sins ? Do they not call conversion from 
sin to righteousness, a change of the heart 1 In 



284 



CONFESSION. 



what does that change of the heart consist, if 
not in the act of sorrow, jnst defined, by which 
the sinner hates, abominates, and detests all 
the evil he has done, and firmly, efficaciously 
resolyes never, never to sin again ? But, more- 
over, the motives of that sincere and universal 
sorrow must be supernatural, that is to say, 
they must be sought in the order of grace, and 
not in the order of nature merely. "What more 
natural, than, that a drunkard, for instance, 
after spending a competency, or a fortune, in 
saloons or grogshops, after reducing his family 
to poverty and destitution, should, when his 
eyes are opened, regret the evil consequences 
of his passion, — that the tliief, when caught 
in the commission of the crime, should feel 
sorry for the consequences of his theft ? But 
the motives of their sorrow are by no means 
sufficient, to obtain the pardon of their sins 
before God, or the priest. Our Catholic sorrow 
must, from the heart of men, reach the heart of 
God. Sin is an insult to divine majesty, a 
violation of divine law ; our sorrow must tend 
thither whither tended our sin. Hence we must 
sorrow either because of the deformity, the 
heinousness of sin in the sight of infinite justice 
and infinite holiness ; or because by sId, we 
have sepai^ated ourselves from God, lost Eea- 



COOTESSIOIfr. 



285 



ven, and deserved hell, or because by it, we 
have crucified anew in our hearts the Ee- 
deemer of the World. Or, better still, we 
should grieve through motives of pure, dis- 
interested love, as when an otherwise dutiful 
daughter has ofiended a loving mother, she 
exclaims in the excess of her remorse : " Not 
because, O dearest mother, by my disobe- 
dience to thy will, I have deserved to live 
forever under thy displeasure, and the frown of 
thy anger ; not because, by my affront, I have 
merited to be banished from my dear loved 
home, and to be deprived of my inheritance, 
does my heart break with grief and sorrow for 
having offended thee ! No, dearest of mothers ; 
but because, by my crime, I have ruffled the 
loveliest of natures, marred the happiness of 
the best of mothers, insulted the goodness of 
the most amiable of earthly characters, there- 
fore do I grieve and sorrow. To live under thy 
frown forever; to wander, an exile, the wide 
world over ; to be deprived of the richest in- 
heritance, which it is in thy power to leave to 
thy child, were nothing, if I could but restore 
that sweet calm, that happiness, which I have 
troubled by my fault ! " Even so, the Catholic 
penitent is exhorted, when truly sorry for his 
Bins, to grieve, not any longer from spiritually 



286 



CONCESSION. 



interested motives, however good and snflBcient, 
with the sacrament of penance, to obtain the 
remission of his sins, but from motives of 
snpematm-al charity. He, too, exclaims in the 
bitterness of his soul : " Not, O Lord, because 
by my sin, I have deserved thy anger; not, 
because by it, I have forfeited Heaven, and 
deserved hell ; no, O Lord! but because by it, I 
have offended Thee, who art infinitely good, 
infinitely amiable in Thyself; because by my 
offence, I have, as far as in me lay, marred 
Thy infinite happiness, and caused Thee to 
regret that Thou didst make me ; therefore do 
I repent, and regret from my inmost heart, 
that I have offended Thee, and do firmly pur- 
pose, never, oh ! never again to transgress Thy 
holy law ! " Do dispositions like these seem to 
encom'age sin and the sinner ? Or, rather, are 
they not the best means to eradicate sin from 
the soul ? 

But, you will answer, if this is so, how comes 
it, that even those Catholics who go frequently 
to confession, sin, and sin again; — that the 
swearer swears still, and the drunkard drinks 
again ? To this question we answer. First : 
judge not, and you shall not be judged. J udg- 
ment without mercy to him that hath not done 
mercy. Secondly: do not the same pheno- 



OONFESSIOK. 



287 



mena occur in your system of confession ? Do 
all those among yon, wlio confess themselves 
to God in their bed-chambers, persevere in 
their righteousness ? The real question is not, 
whether those who go to confession can or 
cannot sin again ; but whether, if they do sin, 
they do so in virtue of confession itself? And 
to this we answer most emphatically, that if 
they sin again, they do so, not in virtue of the 
principles involved in confession, but in despite 
of them. Your objection would hold, if the 
principles which the Church inculcates on her 
children, regarding confession, led, of their own 
intrinsic nature, to these consequences; — ^but 
so long as these principles, on that score, point 
and lead to the opposite results, you must find 
the solution of your difficulty in other causes 
than those which you allege. These causes 
are easily found. Human nature is frail, and 
weak ; the human heart is inconstant, the best 
resolves of the human soul disappear like snow 
melting before the sun. Passions may be 
checked, but they cannot be killed. Like the 
roots of bad weeds, they may revive, and 
spring up again. These evils you, as well as 
we, have daily to deplore ; but it remains true, 
that whatever sinner makes a proper use of the 
wholesome remedy of confession, will succeed 



288 



COOTESSION. 



in holding these passions under due control, 
and in avoiding a relapse into many crimes, 
which, without this remedy, he wonld probably 
commit, day after day, till the end of his life. 

Ask those who make the best, and the most 
freqnent use of confession in our Church, what 
is their experience on this subject. 

Ask that young prodigal, who, during many 
years of his passionate youth, lived riotously, 
until health and wealth were alike wasted in 
drunkenness and debauchery, — what has crim- 
soned his once haggard cheeks with the flush 
of health, — what has steadied his once stagger- 
ing limbs, — what has made him once more an 
industrious, an honorable man. He will tell 
you, it is confession. 

Ask that weeping Magdalen, once the by- 
word of scorn in the town — the disgrace of her 
family, the outcast of society — whose virtue 
was for sale to the highest bidder, who added 
theft, drunkenness, and murder, to the cata- 
logue of her crimes, — ask her, what has made 
her the chaste, the sober, the respectable girl, 
whom every one respects and honors. She 
will say : I went, like my prototype, in the 
Scriptures, and knelt at the feet of the minister 
of my Master ; I bathed them with my tears ; 
[ made an humble, a contrite confession of my 



CONFESSIOK. 



289 



sins, and they were forgiven me, and I was 
reinstated in friendship and lovewitli God and 
man." 

"Who are the best, most honorable, and re 
spected members of onr Church? Precisely 
those who go frequently to confession. Whom 
do our separated brethren themselves, trust 
and respect most among us ? The merchant, 
the lawyer, the physician, the book-keeper, the 
cashier, the laborer, the servant maid, who 
most frequently and devoutly approach the 
tribunal of penance. 

How often have our separated friends come 
to us, during our ministry, to ask for a clerk or 
book-keeper in their store, or a servant girl for 
their house ; adding, at the same time, " but 
we want a young man who belongs to the so- 
dality, who goes every month to his confession !" 

Tes, kind reader, it is mainly to the confes- 
sional that the world is indebted for the Kttle 
virtue that still exists among men. How many 
a young man and maiden, living in the midst 
of corrupting influences, owe to confession the 
preservation of their purity and their inno- 
cence ! How many a wedded couple ascribe 
to its wholesome influence, the peace and hap- 
piness which preside over their hearth ! How 
many a blasphemer has there learned the proper 



290 



CONFESSION. 



use of his tongue, to praise and bless the name 
of the Lord, his God ! How many a fornicator 
has there been taught the fearful consequences 
of his lust ; how many an adulterer has there 
sworn eternal fidelity to the broken-hearted 
spouse of his love ! How many a thief and 
swindler has there learned, not only to be just 
and honest, but, like Zaccheus, to restore his ill- 
gotten goods to their lawful owner, or enrich 
the poor with the wages of his iniquity ! How 
often does it happen in our missions, that some 
citizen of the town, or some distant firm, re- 
ceives unexpectedly a little note with a sum of 
money under the same envelope, stating that 
the enclosed is due to him from a certain party, 
whose name, for good reasons, must remain 
unknown! What influence sent that sum to 
its owner ? The influence of the confessional, 
without which he Avould, very likely, never 
have received the welcome contents. 

Who can tell all the social and personal ad- 
vantages of this salutary institution ! A light 
in darkness, a guide in doubt, a consoler in 
affliction, a pacifier in trouble, a harmonizer 
in dissension, a vivifier in death, — confession is 
a panacea for every moral disease, a remedy 
for every moral evil, a preventive against every 
sin. Well did the author of "Evangeline," 



COlvrFESSION-. 



291 



though himself a stranger to the Church, ap- 
preciate the wholesome influence of the sacra- 
ment of penance, when he ^vrote : 

" Fair was slie to behold, that maidea of seventeen summers 
. . . But a celestial brightness, a more sethereal beauty 
Shone on her face, and encircled her form, when, after 
confession, 

Homeward serenely she walked with God's benediction 
upon her. 

When she had passed, it seemed like the ceasing of ex- 
quisite music ! " 

Bnt the inflnence of confession is especially 
vyholesome at the honr of death. Yon say, 
kind reader, I confess my sins to God so do 
we ; but we confess them moreover to God 
through his minister, whom he has appointed 
for that purpose. "When kings and emperors, 
or republics, make peace with nations with 
whom they have been at war, they do so 
through their representatives, their ministers 
and ambassadors. The Lord of Lords and 
King of Kings pursues the same method. And 
very reasonably so. For sin being an offence 
against God, who knows and sees all things, is 
known to God the very moment it is commit- 
ted. Hence, in that view, it needs no longer 
any confession. It likewise deserves punish- 
ment, and, as soon as it is committed, it de 



292 



COJTFESSION. 



serves eternal sliame and confusion. But this 
punishment, tkrough the goodness and mercy 
of God, does not always immediately overtake 
the sinner. It is delayed in the hope that the 
sinner may repent. What more reasonable 
than that God, when He sees the sinner re- 
pent of his evil ways, should, in exchange 
for the eternal shame and confusion due 
to sin in hell, require of the repenting de- 
linquent, that he should suffer the momen- 
tary shame and confusion, due to his crimes, 
at the feet of His ambassador, while he reveals 
to him their heinousness and deformity. But 
you, my friend, are left to your own judgment 
in this important reconciliation. Without a 
visible representative of the justice and mercy 
of Heaven, you rely upon yom^ own convictions 
and feelings for the certainty of your recon- 
ciliation with your offended Master. How 
easy it is to be deceived in these convictions, 
and especially in these feelings ! Hence, how 
many of our separated brethren have we found , 
who, on their conversion to the Church, ac- 
knowledged that they never felt satisfied with 
their repentance, and confession to God alone ; 
that, notwithstanding their endeavor to con- 
vince themselves that it was the method of 
reconciliation pomted out by the Scriptures, 



COKFESSIOI?'. 



293 



tlieir doubts and tlieir fears of still abiding in 
God's wrath returned. Tliis fact occurs especi- 
ally at the hour of tlieir departure hence. At 
that dreadful moment, when the hopes and 
fears of earth give place to the conflicting anti- 
cipations of the future ; when time casts his 
vanishing shadow upon the boundless circle of 
eternity, then it is that sinful man needs some- 
thing more solid than the educational prejudices 
of childhood, the imaginative convictions of 
youth, or the worldly-minded and self-interested 
views of manhood. Then, those whom mercy 
favors, are willing to purchase the precious 
pearl of the everlasting kingdom, at any price 
which may be asked of the buyer. Then, they 
call in the priests of the Church, and tremb- 
lingly exclaim : " Father ! I sent for you to 
make my peace with Heaven before I die. In 
the frivolity of my youth, in the busy stir of 
manhood, I cared not, or neglected seriously to 
look into the secrets of eternity; now that I 
am on the brink of the fearful precipice, I crave 
the assistance of your steady hand, to guide 
me safely across its threatening abyss ; I want 
o make my confession. Father, of all my evil 
deeds, and I beg of you, as the minister of God, 
that pardon which I dare not hope from Him 
alone, since He has appointed you His repre- 

25* 



294 



CONFESSION. 



sentative, and said to you : " Whosesoever sins 
you shall remit, they are remitted unto them ; 
and whosesoever sins you shall retain, they are 
retained." Oh, how peacefully, how placidly 
they sleep in the Lord, after they have heard 
from the lips of that representative : " Many 
sins are forgiven thee, because thou hast loved 
much ! " 

Kind reader, were you ever present at the 
death-bed of a good, a truly penitent Catholic? 
Did you ever witness the calm composure with 
which he looked grim death in the face, after 
he had made his last confession ? Did you 
observe that unshaken conviction which ex- 
pelled all fear, that firm resignation with which 
he received the terrible message : " Thou must 
die ; thou canst live no longer ! " Did you 
hear him exclaim, like St. Aloysius Gonzaga : 
" We are rejoiced in the things which have 
been said to us ; we shall enter the house of the 
Lord?" Whence this peace and tranquillity 
at the approach of the last struggle of life with 
death ? Ah ! fi^om the certainty, the unwa- 
vering conviction, that, having done what he 
could, to repent for and confess his sins, they 
are forgiven him in Heaven, as they were for- 
given him on earth, by the ministry of the 
Cliurch. 



CONFESSION. 



295 



Kind reader, look, oli! look seriously into 
this all-important matter. There is question 
of your soul ; question of eternal woe, or eter- 
nal bliss. Remember, that one day we must 
all appear before the judgment-seat of our 
Lord Jesus Christ. Remember, that nothing 
is hidden from His sight ; that He searcheth 
the very hearts and reins of man. Fear not 
men ; but fear Him who can destroy body and 
soul in hell. What are the transitory shame 
and confusion which accompany confession of 
sin, compared with the eternal shame and con- 
fusion which must be endured by the unre- 
penting sinner ? 

Better to blush here, for a passing hour, than 
to crimson with everlasting shame. Let us 
conclude, in the words of Tertullian: "If (after 
all we have said) you still draw back, "let 
your mind turn to that eternal fire which con- 
fession extinguishes." 



VI. 



ON PUEGATOET Al^D INDULGENCES. 

" It is, therefore, a lioly and wliolesome tlionglit to pray 
for the dead tliat tliey may be loosed from sins." 2 Mach. 
xii. 46. 

f 

While the Cliiircli, in virtue of her belief in 
the Communion of Saints, honors and venerates 
the spirits of those who reign with Christ in 
glory, and prays to them to obtain through their 
intercession favors and blessings for her chil- 
dren; she, in virtue of the same faith, and from 
motives of true brotherly love, offers her sacri- 
fices and prayers to God in behalf of those 
souls, who, on leaving this world, were not 
pure enough immediately to be admitted into 
Heaven. She prays for the souls in purgatory. 
On this head the Church teaches two things, 
which must be believed under pain of heresy : 
1st, That there is a purgatory ; 2d, That the 
souls there detained are helped by the sujBfrages 



ON PUEGATORY AXB INDULGENCES. 297 

of tlie faitliful, but principally by tbe accepta- 
ble sacrifice of the altar. 

It is well to remember tbat tliese two things 
are the only ones which are strictly of faith 
among us. All other questions on this subject 
are open to discussion. The Church obtrudes 
no private opinions of theologians or philoso- 
phers on the minds of her children. And al- 
though among those opinions there are some 
which, on account of the universality of behef, 
and the intrinsic worth of the arguments on 
which they rest, it would be rashness to gain- 
say or deny, yet she places none under the ban 
of her excommunication save those who deny 
the above two articles of her constant belief and 
practice. The Church, therefore, has not deter- 
mined the location of purgatory, nor decided 
whether it is a determined place at all. Nei- 
ther has she specified how long the souls of the 
departed are detained in their sujBfering, nor 
whether it is by material fire they are cleansed, 
or merely by a sorrow for their past sins. Nor 
has she defined the much disputed question of 
the manner in which the suflErages of the faith- 
ful are applied to their relief. 

How do we prove the existence of purgatory, 
or a middle state in which those souls find 
themselves after death, who died in lesser or 



298 01<5- PUSGATOEY AXD INDULGENCES. 

venial sins, or wlio, after having obtained the 
pardon of grievous sins, did not fully satisfy the 
divine justice as to the temporal punishments 
which remain due to sin after the guilt thereof 
and the eternal punishment have been for- 
given ? 

Our first scriptural proof is found in the 
second book of Machabees, where we read the 
following : " And making a gathering, he [Ju- 
das Machabeus] sent twelve thousand drachms 
of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice, to be of- 
fered for the sins of the dead, thinking well 
and religiously concerning the resurrection. 
(For if he had not hoped that they that were 
slain should rise again, it would have seemed 
Buperfiuous and vain to pray for the dead.) 
And because he considered that they, who had 
fallen asleep with godliness, had great grace 
laid up for them. It is, therefore, a holy and 
wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that 
they may be loosed fi:om sins. (2 Mach. xii. 43, 
44, 45, 46.) 

From this passage we learn that the Jews, 
one hundred and fifty years before Christ, were 
accustomed to offer sacrifices and prayers for 
the dead that they might be loosed from their 
sins ; and the Holy Ghost commends the prac- 
tice. But this practice could not exist without 



ON PUEGATOEY AND INDULGENCES. 299 

faith in purgatory. For tlie J ews, as well as 
we, believed, on the one hand, that nothing 
defiled can enter into Heaven ; and, on the 
other, that out of hell there is no hope of re- 
demption. They did not pray, therefore, for 
those who, on theu' exit from this world, de- 
served immediately to go and take their rest 
in Abraham's bosom, nor for those whose grie- 
vous sins doomed them, like Dives, to ever- 
lasting wo. But they prayed for a class of 
Bouls who were in a middle state of expiation, 
and who could be helped by sacrifice and 
prayer. 

It may, be and it has been said by our separ- 
ated brethren, that they do not believe in the 
inspiration of the books of the Machabees. To 
this we answer: Whose province is it to de- 
termine the authenticity and canonicity or in- 
spiration of the Scriptures ? Was this left to 
the arbitrary will of every individual, or to the 
same authority to which, as we have seen in our 
lecture on the Church, Christ left the power of 
interpreting the meaning of the Scriptures? 
If left to every individual, how will you settle 
this matter on your own responsibility? It 
would require years of study, a keen, discern- 
ing spirit of criticism, and much historical 
knowledge, to come to any reasonable conclu- 



300 ON PURGATORY AND INDULGENCES. 

sion, and even then your conclusion would 
likely incline you to our belief, or leave you 
in total suspense as to the real truth in the 
matter. 

But, aside from this view of the case, it is 
certain, that the books of the Machabees are 
authentic history, and as such they record the 
faith and practice of the Synagogue on the sub- 
ject, at a time that the J ews were still God's 
chosen people, and professed the true rehgion. 
It was in virtue of their religious convictions 
that they offered sacrifice and prayers for the 
dead. Now if these convictions were errone- 
ous, it seems to us that the Saviour would have 
warned them against that practice, and con- 
demned the error on which it rested. "While 
He condemned all other errors, schisms, and 
innovations, that had crept in among them 
through the teaching of the Pharisees, Saddu- 
cees, and Essenes, He was silent on this score, 
and yet it was a practice which was visible to 
all, which engaged in its behalf the most solemn 
rites of the synagogue, the offering of public 
sacrifice and prayer. Though He often spoke 
to the Jews of the dead and the resurrection, 
He never once alluded to this practice as to an 
error in the faith, and never so much as insin 
uated that it was (what Calvin so loudly pro- 



ON PURGATORY AND INDULGENCES. 301 

claims it to be) an invention of Satan, and in- 
jurious to the merits of His cross. 

And thougli He did not give any explicit 
explanation of the doctrine, nor any explicit 
approbation of the practice (at least so far as 
we can ascertain by the written word), we 
should, with the existence of the Jewish faith 
and practice as a fact before ns, conclude that 
as there was no necessity to teach what was 
already believed and done. He gave it His 
sanction by His very silence. 

Moreover, our Saviour tanght certain doc- 
trines whence this belief and practice may be 
at least indirectly concluded. 

Thus, spealdng of the sin against the Holy 
Ghost, He tells ns: '^It shall be forgiven, 
neither in this world, neither in the world to 
come." (Matt. xii. 32.) "Without investigat- 
ing, in this place, what the Saviour, properly 
speaking, meant by the sin against the Holy 
Ghost, let ns analyze the meaning of His words: 
First of all, remark that as our Saviour never 
acted, so He never spoke nselessly. All His 
words were life and truth, and though Heaven 
and earth may pass away, the word of the Lord 
shall not pass away ; it abideth for ever and 
ever. 

According to our Eedeemer's reasoning, then, 



302 ON PUKGATORY AND INDULGENCES. 

there are some sins wliicli are forgiven in tlie 
next world. This is evidently implied in that 
part of the text which says. It shall not be 
forgiven in the world to come. If there is no 
sin whatever which is forgiven in the world to 
come, then the Saviour would have uttered that 
part of His sentence uselessly, unnecessarily. 
To give them any meaning, you must sup- 
pose that He reasons thus: You know that 
there are some sins which failing to be par- 
doned here, may yet be forgiven hereafter, but 
the sin against the Holy Ghost is of so heinous 
a nature, that it is very difficult and next to 
impossible to receive pardon for it, either here 
or hereafter. But it was an article of faith 
that in the other world, no sin is forgiven in 
Heaven, since nothing defiled can enter it, and 
that out of Hell there is no redemption ; it re- 
mains, therefore, that if any sin is ever for- 
given in the world to come, that sin exists in a 
middle state, between Heaven and Hell. That 
state we call Purgatory ; Christ then, indirect- 
ly, at least, confirmed the Jews in their beliel 
in Purgatory. 

Had it not been an article of faith among 
the Jews, how comes it then that they have 
always, even till our own day, prayed for the 
departed? It is a well known fact, that in 



ON PTJPwGATORY AND INDULGENCES. 303 

their prayer, "Kadish/' they implore rest to 
the souls of the departed. 

It was to this faith in purgatory that St. 
Paul doubtless alluded, wken, without any con- 
demnation, he speaks of the practice of bap- 
tizing for the dead. (1 Cor. xv. 29.) 

The fathers of the Church have seen another 
indirect proof of this doctrine, in the following 
passage fi'om St. Paul's first epistle to the Co- 
rinthians (iii. 12-15) : " Now if any man build 
upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious 
stones, wood, hay, stubble, every man's work 
shall be made manifest ; for the day shall de- 
clare it, because it shall be revealed by fire. 
If any man's work abide, which he hath built 
thereon, he shall receive a reward. If any 
man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer 
loss : but he himself shall be saved ; yet so as 
by fire." On these words Origen comments as 
follows : " If, on the foundation of Chi'ist, 
you have built not only gold and silver and 
precious stones, but also wood, and hay, and 
stubble, what do you expect when the soul 
sliall be separated from the body ? "Would you 
enter into Heaven, with your wood, and hay, 
and stubble, to defile the kingdom of God : or, 
on account of these encumbrances, remain 
without, and receive no reward for your gold 



SOi ON PURGATOEY AND INDULGENCES. 

and silver and precious stones? Neither is 
tliis just. It remains then that you be com- 
mitted to the fire, which shall consume the 
light materials ; for om' God, to those who can 
comprehend heavenly things, is called a con- 
sumingfire. But this fire consumes not the 
creature, but what the creature has himself 
built, wood, and hay, and stubble. It is man- 
ifest that, in the first place, the fire destroys 
the wood of our transgressions, and then re- 
turns to us the reward of our good works." 
(Hom. xvi. in Jer.) In the same manner do 
St. Ambrose and St. Jerome comment on this 
passage of the Apostle. 

But the most unexceptionable argument on 
this subject is the concurrent testimony of tra- 
dition. Calvin himself could not deny that 
the custom of praying for the dead existed for 
more than thirteen hundred years before his 
tune. (Instit., B. 2, c. 5, § YO.) 

TertuUian, as early as the second century, 
reckons oblations for the dead, on the anniver- 
sary day of their departure, among the Apos- 
tolical Traditions. (De Cor. Mil.) In his 
work on " Single Marriages," he advises a 
widow to pray for the soul of her departed 
husband, imploring for him repose, and a par- 
ticipation in the first resurrection, and making 



ON" PURGATORY AND INDULGENCES. 305 

oblations for him on tlie anniversary days of 
his death, which, if she neglect, it may truly 
be said of her that, as far as in her lies, she has 
repudiated her husband. (Ch. x.) Tertullian, 
then, considered it a solemn duty, whose obli- 
gation came down from the Apostles them- 
Belves, to offer sacrifices and prayers for the 
Eouls of the departed. 

St. Cyprian says: "Our predecessors pru- 
dently advised that no brother, departing this 
life, should nominate any churchman his ex- 
ecutor ; and should he do it, that no oblation 
should be made for him, nor sacrifice offered 
for his repose ; of which we have had a late 
example, when no oblation was made, nor 
prayer, in his name, offered in the Church." 
(Epist. Ixvi.) 

St. Ambrose writes : " "Why were the orato- 
ries destined to savage destruction, wherein 
prayers are offered up to the sovereign God ; 
peace and pardon are implored for all men, 
magistrates, soldiers, kings, fi*iends, and ene- 
mies; for those who are alive, and for those 
who have quitted their bodies ?" (Adv. Gentes 
Lib. iv.) 

St. Ephrem, in his " Testament," thus speaks. 

* My brethren, come to me and prepare me for 

my departure, for my strength is wholly gone. 
26* 



306 ON PUEGATORT AND INDULGENCES. 

Accompany me in Psalms and in your prayers ; 
and constantly make oblations for me. "When 
the thirtietli day shall be completed, then re- 
member me ; for the dead are helped by the 

offerings of the living If the sons of 

Mathathias, who celebrated their feasts in fig 
m'e only, could cleanse those from guilt by their 
ofierings, who fell in battle, how much more 
shall the priests of Christ aid the dead by their 
oblations?" (Test, xii.) 

St. Augustine, as usual, states the doctrine 
and practice of the Church in a few, clear 
words : " The prayers of the Church or of good 
persons are heard in favor of those Christians 
who departed this life not so bad as to be 
deemed unworthy of mercy, nor so good as to 
be entitled to immediate happiness. So, also, 
at the resurrection of the dead, some will be 
found to whom mercy will be imparted, having 
gone through those pains to which the spirits 
of the dead are liable. It would not have been 
said of some, with truth, that their sin shall not 
be forgiven, neither in this world ^ nor in the 
world to come^ imless some sins were forgiven 
in the next world." (De Civit. Dei, lib. xxiv.) 

Every one knows the request which his dying 
mother, St. Monica, addressed to him : " This 
only I request of you," she said, " that you will 



ON PURGATORY AND INDUL(:tENCES. 307 

remember me at tlie altar of the Lord wherever 
you may be." (Lib. ix. Conf. IT. 27.) 

It is alike cmious and iustructive to learn 
that all the leading sects of the first four or 
five centuries of Christianity agreed with the 
Church on this point. Thus we read in the 
liturgy of the Nestorians of Malabar : " Let us 
be mindful of our fathers and brethren, and of 
the faithful who are departed out of this world 
in the orthodox faith ; let us pray the Lord to 
absolve them, to remit their sins and their 
transgressions, to make them worthy to par- 
take of eternal felicity with the just, who con- 
formed to the divine will." 

The liturgy of the Chaldean Nestorians says : 
" Forgive the trespasses and sins of those who 
are dead." 

The Armenians, in their liturgy, say through 
the deacon : " We require that mention be 
made in this sacrifice of all the faithful in gen- 
eral, men and women, young and old, who de- 
parted with faith in Jesus Christ." The choir 
answers : " Be mindful, O Lord, and have mer- 
cy on them." The priest alone : " Grant them 
repose, light, and a place among thy saints, in 
Thy Heavenly Kingdom." 

The liturgy of the Greek Church, in Constan- 
tinople, Calabria, Apulia, Georgia, Mingrelia, 



308 ON PUEGATORY AND INDULGENCES. 

Bulgaria, and Eussia, as well as at Eome, has 
the following : " We offer prayer to Thee, also 
for tJie repose and the pardon of Thy servant 
N., in a place of light, from which grief and 
amentation are far removed," etc. 

The Coptic litnrgy: "Be mindful, also, O 
Lord, of all those who have slept and reposed 
in the priesthood, and ui every rank of the 
secular life," etc. 

The Abyssinian or Ethiopian liturgy : " Have 
mercy, O my God, on the souls of thy servants, 
men and women, who have been fed with Thy 
body and blood, and have slept at death in 
Thy faith." 

In the Syrian and Jacobite liturgies, the 
deacon says : " Again and again, we commem- 
orate all the faithful departed, those who are 
departed in the true faith, from this holy altar, 
and from this town, and from every country. . 
We pray, we beseech, we entreat Christ our 
Lord, that through the innumerable acts of His 
mercy, He would render them worthy to re- 
ceive the pardon of their offences, and the re- 
mission of their sins, and would bring us and 
them to His kingdom in Heaven." 

Is it not strange that this invention of Satan, 
as Calvin calls prayers and sacrifices for the 
dead, should have been known not only in 



ON PURGATOKY AND INDULGENCES. 309 

Rome but all over tlie world, so that the whole 
of Christendom may be said to have been in- 
fected with an error so injurious to the cross of 
Jesus Christ? 

Luther himself did not at first reject this 
humane and consoling doctrine. " As for me,'' 
said he, " who believe strongly, I might even 
venture to say more, who Tcnow that Purgatory 
exists, I can readily be persuaded that it is 
mentioned in the Scriptures. All that I know 
of Purgatory is that souls are there in a state 
of suffering, and may be relieved by our works 
and prayers." Molanus tells us that one por- 
tion of the Lutherans not only approve, but 
practise this kind of prayer. (Bossuet, Projet 
de Peimion, vol. i., 90.) 

The Anglican bishop, Forbes, writes : Let 
not the ancient practice of praying, and mak- 
ing oblations for the dead, received throughout 
the Universal Church of Christ, almost from 
the very time of the Apostles, be any more re- 
jected by Protestants as unlawful or vain. 
Let them reverence the judgment of the prim- 
itive Church, and admit a practice strengthened 
by the uninterrupted profession of so many 
ages ; and let them, as well in public as in 
private, observe this rite, not as absolutely com- 
manded by the divine law, yet as lawful, and 



310 ON PUEGATOKY AND INDULGENCES. 

likewise profitable, and as always approYed by 
the Universal Chiircli, that by tbis means, at 
length, a peace, so earnestly desired by all 
learned and honest men, may be restored to 
tlie Christian world." (Discourse on Purgatory.) 
He furthermore holds, with St. Chrysostom, 
that this practice is derived, probably, from the 
institution of the Apostles. 

In the epitaph composed for himself by the 
Bishop of St. Asaph's, Isaac Barrow, we find, 
among other things, this sentence : " O all ye 
that pass by into the house of the Lord, the 
house of prayer, pray for your fellow-servant, 
that he may find mercy in the day of the Lord !" 
And in that of Thorndike, prebendary of Col- 
legiate Church, we find, " Do thou, reader, im- 
plore for him rest, and a happy resurrection in 
Christ." 

Many other learned divines of the Anglican 
Church, such as Archbishop Sheldon and 
Bishops Blandford, Taylor, etc., believed the 
same doctrine. 

And reasonably so. For, does not reason, 
enlightened by faith, naturally lead us to the 
conclusion, that there is such a state as we call 
purgatory. We are told by the Apostle of the 
Gentiles, that " God will render to every man 
according to his works" (Eom. ii. 6); and 



ON PUKGATORY AND INDULGENCES. 311 

Christ himself says, "Every idle word that 
men shall speak, they shall render an account 
for it in the day of judgment." (Matt. xii. 36.) 
And we are convinced, too, that we know not 
the day nor the hour when the Son of Man 
Cometh. 

Suppose, then, that yon were surprised by 
death, the very moment you should have ut- 
tered an idle word, without having had the 
time to repent, would you think yourself 
guilty of everlasting punishment in hell, on 
account of that idle word? And yet, you 
would be called into judgment for it by your 
Saviour. If it is amenable to His dread sen- 
tence, it is something that deserves punishment. 
On your principle, that after death all go im- 
mediately either to Heaven or to Hell, where 
would you go with your idle word ? 

There is a distinction between sin and sin, 
and, consequently, between punishment and 
punishment. The distinction is evident, from 
the Scriptures : " I say to you, that whosoever 
is angry with his brother, shall be in danger of 
the judgment. And whosoever shall say to his 
brother, Eaca, shall be in danger of the council. 
And whoever shall say : Thou fool, shall be 
guilty of hell &e." (Matt. v. 22.) St. John 
speaks of a sin that is not to death, and of a 



312 ON PUEGATOEY AND INDULGENCES. 



sin that is to death. (1 John, v. 16, 17.) Our 
Saviour said, that he who had betrayed Him 
hath a greater sin than Pilate, who condemned 
Him. (John xix. 11.) If as you assert, there 
is no such distinction, how comes it that you 
allow your courts of justice, your codes of 
criminal laws, to make one in practice ? How 
4 comes it, that all punishment is not capital ; 
that there is such a distinction as grand and 
petit larceny ; murder in the first, second, and 
third degree ? "Would you consider that your 
child is equally guilty before God, when he is 
a little stubborn or disobedient, as when he 
would plunge a deadly weapon into your 
heart ? On what do nations and individuals 
ground these practical distinctions in daily life, 
if not on the principles of eternal law, and 
justice, which emanate from God Himself? 
God, then, makes the very same distinctions. 
He is olSended more by one than another trans- 
gression of His law, and the one deserves 
greater punishment than the other. He will, 
therefore, punish the unbeliever and blas- 
phemer, the thief and adulterer, more severe- 
ly than him who utters an idle word, or 
takes a slight pleasure in a thought of self- 
complacency, or vanity. The murderer or 
perjurer will experience the weight of his 



ON PUKGATOEY AOT) mDTJLGENCES. 313 



wmth to a greater extent than the man who 
gave way to a slight impnlse of impatience. 
The drunkard will fare worse than he who, 
while he observed the laws of temperance, 
drank his coffee or his tea not for the glory of 
God, as the Apostle bids ns do, but because it 
pleases the palate, and gratifies the appetite. 
The woman who stands before the looking- 
glass to make her toilet, and, with a slight touch 
of vanity, inwardly admires at once her own 
beauty and the nice fit of her dress, does not 
commit the crime of those who, by their nudity, 
would entice others to sin and corruption. 

Suppose, my friends, that you were present 
at the death-bed of your mother. We will 
suppose, that she was a good woman, a virtuous 
wife, a loving mother, a devout Christian, after 
her own views, and ways of piety, and godli- 
ness. But, like most people, she had her 
faults. Perhaps she was a little hasty — slightly 
vain, inclined to worldly-mindedness in dress 
or furniture, not so, however, as to exceed her 
means, or her rank in life. She had, at times, 
bewailed these peccadillos, and been pardoned 
their guilt. But now, as she draws nearer to 
the portals of eternity, and a burning fever is 
about to take away her reason, vrithout return, 
she gives way to a moment's impatience ; and- 



314 ON PURGATORY AND INDULGENCES. 

before she has time to repent, she loses the nse 
of her faculties, and dies. Have yon the heart 
to say of that mother : She died in a slight 
act of impatience, and she is gone to hell? 
And yet, yon know that repentance is not to 
be had beyond the grave — that the time of 
probation is passed. No, yonr heart, on that 
occasion, as on most others, wonld instinctively 
show its Catholicity. You wonld drop on 
yonr knees, and exclaim, " O Lord, have mercy 
on the sonl of my mother. Receive her spirit 
in mercy, and in peace !" And if yon conld 
pray thus immediately upon her departure 
hence, why not afterwards, as well ? Why not, 
on the third day, or in the third week, month, 
or year ? 

Now, we repeat again, and insist upon the 
case : Is it not probable, that many thus guilty 
of these minor faults, are surprised by death 
before they have time to repent for them, 
and consequently, to obtain the pardon of 
them ? And if they do thus die, whither do 
their spirits go ? To Heaven ? Impossible ; foi 
they are still defiled ; and nothing that is de 
filed can enter there. To hell, eternal hell, 
eternal punishment ? That seems contrary to 
the mercy of Him whose mercies are above aU 
His works. But they will be cleansed by the 



ON PUEGATORY Am) INDULGEiq-CES. 315 

merits of the blood of the Lamb. "Wlien? 
After they are dead ? And bow ? "Without 
repenting ; without grieving ; without suffer- 
ing for their faults, and transgressions ? Then 
hell ceases to be a hell, and becomes a pur- 
gatory, a place of expiation, and not of repro- 
bation ; for, then the greatest sinner has the 
same hope laid up in his bosom as the great- 
est saint. He, too, has a strong claim on 
the merits of the blood of the Redeemer, and, 
as Luther taught, a greater claim, because 
Christ came to seek and save the sinner, and 
not the just ; and consequently, his claims on 
Christ increase in proportion to the number, 
and the heinousness of his iniquities. "Who 
does not see that such doctrine is inj\mous to 
the cross of Clirist, destructive of all virtue 
and morality, yea, of faith itself? 

Besides those who die in minor sins, there are 
others who die absolved of their sins, whether 
mortal or venial, but who, at the moment 
of their death, have not fully satisfied divine 
justice as to the temporal punishments which 
remain due to them, after the guilt, and, in the 
case of mortal sins, the eternal punishment, 
have been forgiven. Three things are to be 
distinguished in every deadly sin : First, the 
guilt, properly so called, or the affi-ont, the in- 



316 ON PURGATORY AND INDULGENCES. 

suit, whicli the sinner offers the Lawgh'er, 
whose law he transgresses, the Creator to whom 
he owes love and obedience. Hence, God said 
to the Jews, " If I be a Father, where is my 
honor ? And if I be a Master, where is my 
fear ?" (llatt. i. 6.) Second, The eternal punish- 
ment which every mortal sin deserves. Christ, 
the Judge, will condemn all unrepenting sin- 
ners, who have committed deadly crimes, to 
everlasting fire. Lastly, the temporal punish- 
ment w^hich is due to every sin. Sin is commit- 
ted in time by those who journey on towards the 
shoreless ocean of eternity. Immediate death 
of body and soul does not always follow the 
commission of crime. Yet, iniquity of its very 
nature cries for punishment, at the very mo- 
ment it is committed. The eternal punish- 
ment is, through mercy, delayed. The sinner, 
then, who would postpone his repentance till 
the moment of his death, would escape aU 
punishment due to sin, if there were no other 
than an eternal punishment in hell. For, on 
the hypothesis that he repents at his death, he 
would innnediately enter upon the joys of 
Heaven. The justice of God and the natm^e 
of sin require, that he should suffer a temporal 
punishment for his wickedness. But these 
punishments may be so numerous, and so great, 



ON PUEGATOEY AND INDULGENCES. 317 

on account of the many and lieinons sins com- 
mitted, tliat perfect atonement has not been 
made by the sinner, at the moment he expires. 
In such a case he does not go to hell, for he 
has repented, and the gnilt of sin and its eter- 
nal punishment have been forgiven ; nor can 
ne go to Heaven, for some of the consequences 
of his sin still remain nnexpiated. In that 
case, he goes to purgatory, there, by temporal 
punishments, to make satisfaction for the con- 
sequences of his sin. And, since on earth we 
are allowed to pray for each other, and the 
petition of the just man availeth much before 
God, in behalf of his fellow-men, so, even after 
death, the prayers of the Church, and her 
children, avail much in behalf of the poor 
souls who undergo the punishment of their 
sins in their temporary state of suffering and 
expiation. That such punishments are in- 
flicted by God, upon the sinner, even after his 
sins have been forgiven, is evident, from the 
Scriptures, and daily experience. We all 
know, that God forgave our repentant parents 
the guilt and eternal punishment due to their 
disobedience, and yet left them to undergo 
temporal punishments. 
"W e read, that David repented of his double 

sin of adultery and murder, and that God for- 
27* 



318 ON PUKGATORY AND INDULGENCES. 

gave tliem both, through His propliet, Nathan ; 
yet, the child that was born to him was doomed 
to a premature death. In vain did David 
* weep, and implore the mercy of the Lord ; in 
vain did he keep a fast, and prostrate himself 
upon the ground, that the child might live. 
" It came to pass, on the seventh day, that the 
child died." (2 Kings, xii. 14-18.) When, 
through vanity, David had numbered his peo- 
ple, his heart was struck with remorse, he con- 
fessed his sin, and prayed for pardon ; yet, not- 
withstanding his repentance, he was punished, 
and the prophet gave him his choice of one of 
three temporal punishments, war, famine, or 
pestilence. He chose the last ; and there died 
of the people, seventy thousand, that day. (lb. 
xxiv.) 

Do we not witness the same in every-day 
life ? "When your child is regenerated by the 
waters of baptism, and its sin is cleansed, are 
all the consequences of that sin removed, to- 
gether with its guilt, and exclusion from the 
kingdom of Heaven ? Does it not weep, and 
wail ; is it not subject to disease, and suflering, 
and death, as well as before ? Can a just God 
punish without cause? "When you have re- 
pented of your sins, do you escape all the pun- 
ishments, the afflictions of life? Yet, you^' 



ON PURGATORY AND INDULGENCES. 319 

eins are forgiven yon. Yon trnst in the saving 
blood of yonr [Redeemer, that all is well with 
yon. And yet, yon fail in business ; yonr crops 
are destroyed by a hailstorm ; yonr honses and 
barns, with all they contain, become a prey to 
the fury of the flames ; yonr wife, yonr dearest 
child, are taken away from yonr embrace. 
Are not all these punishments willed or per- 
mitted by an all-jnst Providence ? They are, 
therefore, due to yonr sins, even after yon have 
been forgiven. Return, once more, to our first 
hypothesis. Suppose, that at the moment of 
your death, your indebtedness is not fully can- 
celled, does not Divine justice require that yon 
should go to that prison, whence none shall go 
forth, till the last farthing has been paid? 
That prison we call purgatory. 

Cannot the ruler of a people remit a greater, 
and inflict a less punishment, on the ofiender 
against the law ? Does not this happen almost 
daily ? Is not capital punishment often com- 
muted into imprisonment for life, or for a 
stated term of years? And, even when the 
punishment is commuted, cannot the same 
ruler leave to his subjects the privilege of in- 
terceding in behalf of the prisoner, and of ob- 
taining of him a dimunition of, or entire release 
from punishment? Why should not God's 



320 ON PUKGATORY AND INDULGENCES. 

mercy and justice prompt Him to proceed in a 
similar way ? "When, by the prayers of priest 
and people, a hardened sinner has at length 
been brought to repentance ; when, through the 
merits of the saving blood of Christ, his sin, 
and the eternal punishment due to it, have 
been forgiven ; when, instead of these, a cer- 
tain amount of temporal punishment is in- 
flicted, why cannot God allow BUs Church and 
her members to come to the aid of the suflfer- 
ing, and helpless prisoner, and by their prayers 
and oblations, addressed to the throne of mercy, 
obtain for him a partial, or a total release from 
his imprisonment? 

How such practice can be considered in- 
jurious to the Cross and blood of Christ, we are 
at a loss to perceive. Is it injurious to the 
Cross or blood of Christ for a minister of the 
Gospel to pray for the President and the peo- 
ple ; for the happiness and prosperity, tempo- 
ral and spiritual, of his fellow-worshippers ; to 
beg God that He would avert from us the 
ravages of bloody war, the scourge of pestilence, 
and all other calamities, which God inflicts 
upon a nation in His anger ? And how then 
can that same prayer become injurious to 
Christ, when it is addressed for those, who, 
having departed this life, undergo other punish- 



ON PUEaATORY AND INDtJLGENCES. 321 

ments dne to their sins ? Nor can we see suf- 
ficient reason for the violent opposition wMcli 
our separated brethren make to this wholesome 
doctrine. What more comforting to the poor 
sinner than to believe that however displeasing 
sin is to His Maher, and insnlting to His Re- 
deemer, He who knows our frame, who knows 
what is in frail man, who wills not the death oi 
the sinner, but that he should be converted and 
live, makes a distinction between sin and sin, 
malice and malice, iniquity and iniquity, 
punishment and punishment, and that He ob- 
serves this law not with regard to the living 
only, but even with regard to the departed ! 
Without encouraging the sinner in his sins, it 
stimulates his gratitude and his love to greater 
fidelity in the service of His Master, and pre- 
serves him from that fearful despair, which is 
the almost inevitable consequence of the con- 
trary doctrine. For, convinced as every one 
must be by his own sad experience, that even 
the just man falleth seven times, and that who- 
ever saith he hath no sin deceiveth himself, 
and the truth is not in him ; knowing that 
every one of us is bound daily to say : forgive 
us our trespasses, — how can any Christian 
hope to escape hell, if he believes that everj 
sin, however small, deserves eternal punish 



322 ON PUBGATORY AjN^ IHDTjLGENCES. 

ments ? How can lie hope to be so pure at 
tlie hour of his death, as not to deserve that 
horrible retribution ? How consoling, on the 
contrary, to know that, even if God should find 
some stain, which deserves punishment, He 
will not be angry with him forever! How 
consoling the doctrine of prayers and sacrifices 
for the dead, to surviving relatives and friends ! 
To know that the flame of our love for the de- 
parted is not necessarily quenched in the dark- 
ness of the grave ; to know that we can still 
extend a helping hand to those for whom wo 
would have sacrificed our very lives, is a con- 
viction, which soothes the pangs of the loss we 
sustain in their departure, and dries up a por- 
tion, at least, of those otherwise unavailing 
tears, which friendship sheds over their moul- 
dering remains. Is o wonder, therefore, that 
such men as Molanus, the Anglican bishops 
before mentioned, and Dr. Johnson, should 
have borne then' testimony to the reasonable- 
ness of this doctrine, and that the latter should 
have prayed for the repose of his beloved 
mother's soul. 

After establishing the scriptural, traditional, 
and rational grounds for our doctrine on pur- 
gatory, we hope it is not necessary to refute 
the objection that it was gradually introduced 



ON PtJEGATOEY AND INDULGENCES. 323 

into the Cliiircli for the sake of making money 
by masses said for the departed. The dishonest 
motive attributed to the priests of the Church 
needs, however, a brief reply. It is calumnious 
to assert that priests exact money for masses, as 
masses. They are paid for their time and their 
service ; but masses, as sacred and holy prop- 
erty, are not made venal any more than the 
sacraments. Priests receive money in no other 
sf^nse than that which the Apostle implies when 
he writes (1 Cor. ix. 13) : " Know ye not that 
they who work in the holy place, eat the 
things that are of the holy place; and they 
that serve the altar, partake with the altar. 
So also the Lord ordained, that they who 
preach the Gospel, should live of the Gospel." 
Surely, it would be considered slander, if we 
should reason thus with regard to our sepa- 
rated friends : " Tou receive two or three 
thousand a year for preaching to your congre- 
gation ; hence, you sell the Gospel at that 
price." A priest has, to say the least, as much 
right as any minister of the sects, and a much 
greater right than the minister's wife and 
children, who scarcely can be said to preach 
the Gospel, to the support of his people ; for 
he does more for them than does a minister 
for his own ; and to pay his services and time 



324: OK PUEGATORY AND INDULGENCES. 

for saying masses, is one of the means of sup- 
porting him, just- as to be paid for baptizing 
and marrying is one of the means of sup- 
porting the minister and his family. 

"We now pass to the Church's doctrine on 
indulgences, which is closely connected with 
her doctrine on confession and purgatory. The 
Council of Trent declares : " As the power of 
granting indulgences was given by Christ to 
the Church (]\Iatt. xvi. 19 ; xviii. 18 ; John, 
XX. 22, 23), and she has exercised it in the most 
ancient times, this holy Synod teaches and 
commands that the use of them, as being 
wholesome to the Christian people, and ap- 
proved by the authority of Councils, shall be 
retained, and anathematizes those who say 
that they are useless, or deny to the Church 
the power of granting them ; but in this grant 
the Synod wishes, that moderation, agreeably 
to the ancient and approved practice of the 
Chm'ch, be exercised ; lest by too great facility 
ecclesiastical discipline be weakened." (Sess. 
XXV. De Indulg.) The Church, therefore, 
teaches two things : Ist, That she has received 
power from Christ to grant indulgences ; and 
2d, That the use of them is wholesome and 
beneficial. 

Before proving these truths, we must first 



ON PUHGATOKY AND INDULGENCES. 325 

■anderstand what the Church means by an in- 
dulgence. An indulgence is a total or partial 
remission of the temporal punishments which 
remain due to sm, after the guilt and eternal 
punishment have been forgiven. We have al- 
ready seen that there are three things to be 
considered in every deadly sin. Ist, Its guilt ; 
Sd, its eternal, and Sd, its temporal punish- 
ment. The first and second are forgiven by 
the sacraments of baptism and penance, as the 
ordinary channels of pardon ; the latter is ex- 
piated by our sufferings, and our penances, or 
by remission or commutation through an indul- 
gence. 

An indulgence, therefore, has, properly speak- 
ing, nothing to do with the guilt of, and the 
eternal punisment due to mortal sin, nor does 
an indulgence forgive venial sin. Much less is 
it a permission for the commission of future 
sins, as the adversaries of the Church have 
calumniously asserted. An indulgence regards 
temporal punishment only. Many of our 
separated brethren do not sufficiently under- 
stand the nature of an indulgence, and hence 
arises their misrepresentation of the doctrine. 
Many imagine that it forgives sin, and many 
more, that it is a permission to sin. They re- 
present a man who gains a full, or plenary in- 
28 



826 ON PUEGATOEY AND INDULGENCES. 

diligence, as one who for a certain sum of 
money, to "be given to tlie poj)e, bishop, or 
priest, obtains absolution from all his crimes, 
without any sorrow or repentance of heart, 
and, at the same time, a kind of permit, to sin 
as much as he pleases, in the future. Once 
more, therefore, an indulgence has nothing 
whatsoever to do with the guilt of past sins, 
nor their eternal punishment, much less with 
sins to come. And if some of the bulls or 
briefs, regarding the grant of indulgences, 
speak in that strain, they are either falsified by 
our enemies, or else must be understood in the 
only Catholic sense, namely the remission of 
the temporal pimishments which sin deserves. 
Indeed, how could any honest and sensible 
man think the Church so silly as to contradict 
herself on this score ? She teaches most posi- 
tively that in order to obtain the pardon of 
sins committed after baptism, the only ordi- 
nary means instituted by Jesus Christ is the 
sacrament of penance, as we have proved in a 
preceding lecture ; and now, she is made to 
say, by the mouth and pen of our adversaries, 
that the sacrament of penance is by no means 
the only ordinary means, but that indulgences 
without any repentance whatsoever, will answer 
just as welL She says in her doctrine on con- 



ON PUKGATOEY AND mDULGENCES. 327 

fession that sorrow for sin, including a firm 
purpose of amendment, so firm that one should 
be resolved to die rather than offend Almighty 
God by any deadly sin, is an absolutely neces- 
sary condition of pardon for sm ; and in her 
doctrine on indulgences she is made to say, by 
our adversaries, that any one can, on paying a 
certain sum of money, purchase not only par- 
don for sins already committed, but for such 
as he has a mind to commit in the fature. (See 
Abominations of Popery, by De Ccetlogon, p. 
13 ; Strictures on Female Education, by Mrs. 
Hannah More, vol. ii., p. 239.) 

We prove that the Church has power to 
grant indulgences, first from these words of the 
Saviour to St. Peter: " Thou art Peter [a rock], 
and upon this rock I will build My Church, 
and the gates of hell shall not prevail against 
it. And I wall give to thee the keys of the 
kingdom of Heaven. And whatsoever thou 
shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also 
in Heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on 
earth, it shall be loosed also in Heaven." (Matt, 
xvi. 18, 19.) Here, besides the primacy of 
power and jurisdiction given to St. Peter and 
his lawful successors, which power is symbolized 
by the delivery of the keys of the kingdom of 
Heaven, St. Peter receives the fulness of power 



328 OlSr PUEGATOEY AOT) ESTDULGENCES. 

to bind and loose tlie spiritual bonds of bis 
spiritual subjects. These spiritual bonds are 
gin and the consequences of sin. Now, among 
the consequences of sin must be reckoned the 
temporal punishments which (as we have proved 
before) every sin deserves. Peter and his suc- 
cessors, therefore, have received the fulness of 
spiritual power to inflict or to remove whatever 
temporal punishment the sins of their subjects 
deserve. But this is the same as to say that 
the Church has the power to grant indulgences. 
Therefore, the Church possesses the power of 
granting the total or partial remission of the 
temporal punishments which sin deserves. 
This same power, was afterwards communi- 
cated to the other Apostles, so however, that 
the fulness thereof should descend to Peter's 
successors only, from whose jurisdiction the 
descendants of the Apostles, the bishops of the 
Church, should derive such a share as the head, 
the source of power, might be willing to 
communicate to them. Hence, in practice, as 
well as in right, the Pontiffs of Pome alone 
exercise this power, and the Bishops depen- 
dently upon the faculties which they receive 
from them. Nor is there any thing so very 
strange in this doctrine. Socially speaking, 
there must be such a power for the well-being 



OK PUEGATOEY AND rCsTBULGENCES. 



329 



of the members of the social body. What 
kind of government would that be whose ruler 
should not be allowed the power of inflicting 
punishment for transgressions of the law, or 
of releasing those who repent, reform, and prom- 
ise to do better? Our government exercises 
this power daily both through the head of the 
federal government of all the states, and 
through the governor, or ruler of every state 
separately. Suppose you have had the mis- 
fortune of committing a crime against the state, 
and are condemned to death. Your friends 
who know you well, and love you dearly, 
touched with sympathy for your person, meet 
together, draw up a petition to the governor, 
in which they testify to the honesty of your 
character previously to the commission of your 
deplorable deed, assure him of your repen- 
tance, and stake their credit and reputation on 
your good behavior in the future. The gover- 
nor grants the petition, and releases the priso- 
ner. What power has he exercised in your 
regard? The power of absolution from the 
sentence of capital punishment, and the power 
of indulgence, remitting to you, in full, all the 
temporal punishments which you deserved. 
Or, suppose you were sentenced to imprison- 
ment during ten years, and that a similar pe- 

28* 



330 ON PURGATOEY AND INDLUGENCES. 

tition should obtain the abridgment of that 
term by five years ; the governor wonld in that 
instance grant you a^n indulgence of five years' 
temporal punishment. 

The same power exists in every community 
which has a iniler, in every school, academy, 
college, and university, and in every family. 

The Church is an organized society ; it has 
a ruler, a sovereign, or supreme head. The 
members of fhis society are liable to sin, they 
can violate the laws of that society, and, there- 
fore, become amenable to punishment. The 
head will, therefore, be obliged at times to in- 
flict spuitual punishments; and, if occasion 
requires, he must be empowered to remove 
spiritual punishments already inflicted. 

That this power was exercised, is evident 
from St. Paul's epistles to the Corinthians. 
(1 Cor. V. ; and 2 Cor. ii.) St. Paul hearing 
that one of the Corinthian Christians had mar- 
ried his father's wife, writes : 

" For I verily, as absent in body, but present 
in spirit, have judged already as though I was 
present, concerning him that hath so done this 
deed. In the name of om^ Lord Jesus Christ, 
when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, 
with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to 
deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruc- 



ON PUKGATOKY AND INDULGENCES. 331 

tion of tlie flesh, that the spirit may be saved 
in the day of the Lord Jesus Christ." 

Observe here that St. Paul exercises tie right 
of judgment in the case of the incestuous man; 
that he orders the brethren to deliver him over 
to Satan, yet only for a time and in the flesh, 
and that he exercises this power in the name of 
Jesus Christ, the invisible head of the Church. 

When the subject of this temporary punish- 
ment repented, the Apostle, with the same 
power with which he had inflicted the punish- 
ment, removes it. In his second epistle, he 
writes : " Sufficient to such a man is this pun- 
ishment, which was inflicted of many. So that, 
contrariwise, you ought rather to forgive him, 
and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one 
should be swallowed up with overmuch sor- 
row, wherefore I beseech you that you would 
confirm your love toward him. To whom ye 
forgive any thing, I forgive also : for if I for- 
gave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your 
sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ." 

St. Paul was evidently the first to inflict the 
punishment, and the first to remove it (" for if 
I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it"), and 
then orders the assembly, the Church of Co- 
rinth, to forgive, so that he may be restored to 
all the former privileges of church membership. 



332 ON PURGATORY AND INDULGENCES. 



I The Clinrcli, in all ages, has claimed and 
/ exercised this power. In the first general 
Council of Nice, held in 325, we read : " In 
certain cases, they who have given signs of true 
repentance mnst undergo a course of peniten- 
tial works. But, in all cases, the disposition 
and character of repentance must be considered. 
For they who by fear, by tears, by patience, 
and by good works, manifest a sincere conver- 
sion, when they shall have passed over a cer- 
tain time, and begun to communicate with the 
faithful in prayer, to these the bishops may 
show more indulgence, but to those who mani- 
fest indifference, and think it enough that they 
are allowed to enter the Church, these must 
complete the whole period of penance." (Can. 
xii.) In this canon the power of inflicting 
certain temporal punishments, and removing 
the same, is evidently asserted. Every one 
who is acquainted with ecclesiastical history, 
knows how rigorous and severe were the so- 
called canonical penances, inflicted upon cer- 
tain classes of sinners, how often the guilty 
party implored the aid of the martyrs to be 
released from these punishments, and how the 
Church, at the request of these heroes of the 
cross, imparted to those who were worthy, 
^' either a total or partial remission of these pun- 



ON PTJRGATOEY AND INDULGENCES. 333 

isliments. These canonical penances have 
ceased, but the power to inflict them or to 
dispense with them, or to commute them into 
other works of penance, has not been abrogated. 
The regulation of the nature and duration of 
the punishments and the conditions of remis- 
sion, necessarily belongs to the institution that 
has received the power. To her judgment 
must it be left to determine whatever is to bo 
done or observed in this matter. The same 
government may, according to times and cir- 
cumstances, modify, alter, or even annul cer- 
tain penalties or punishments, which other 
times and circumstances made it necessary to 
inflict for the well-being of the nation. Even 
so it is with the government of the Church in 
matters of discipline. The suspension of the 
exercise, or the change of manner in the exer- 
cise, does not destroy the power itself. One 
only thing can be asked of her, namely, that 
she preserve the spirit of the power which al- 
ters, commutes, or even annuls certain punish- 
ments. To this the Church has always been 
true. Hence, though no longer so severe in 
inflicting certain outward punishments on pub 
lie crimes, and more lenient than in the days 
of paganism, in exacting conditions for the 
application of her indulging power, she yet 



334 ON PURGATOEY AND INDULGENCES. 



preserves the essentia] spirit of those days by 
making true sorrow, repentance, and confession 
of sin, together with the worthy i^eception of 
holy communion, fasting, ahnsgiving, or the 
visiting of a certain chiu^ch with sentiments of 
true devotion and piety, the necessary condi- 
tions for gaining an indulgence. It is, there* 
fore, a calumny to say that indulgences take 
the place of repentance and good works, for 
these are inseparably connected with them. 

Moreover, the disposition of the person has 
not a little to do with the reception of the in- 
dulgence. As in all applications of the moral 
law, this disposition may be favorable or un- 
favorable to the application of the benefit. 

Thus, St. Gregory YII. grants indulgences to 
the Bishop of Lincoln, " On condition," as he 
writes, " that applying yourself to good works 
and bewailing your sins, you make of yom- body 
a pure temple to God." 

Pope Gelasius II. approves the principle 
which says : " Each one receives the value of 
indulgences in proportion to his penance and 
good works." 

Innocent lY, writes : " Although indulgences 
are generally granted to labors, perils, and 
devout exercises, some, nevertheless, receive 
more benefit from them than others, according 



ON PURGATORY AND INDULGENCES. 335 

as they dispose themselyes for them with greater 
devotion." 

" The man," says Boniface VIII., " who visits 
the Church of the Apostles most frequently 
and with the greatest devotion, deserves and 
receives the most from indulgences." 

When Pope Urban YIII. proclaimed the 
ordinary jubilee, he thus a-ddressed himself to 
the patriarchs, metropolitans, and bishops : 
" Instruct your people, that in vain will they 
expect to derive any benefit from the sacred 
treasure of indulgences, if they do not prepare 
themselves by a contrite and humble heart, 
and do not exercise themselves in works of 
Christian piety." 

The share, then, which Catholics have in 
plenary or partial indulgences depends not 
only on the power of the indulgences, and the 
fact that they are given, but on the disposition 
of their own heart, and the manner in which 
they fulfil the conditions attached to them. 

What shall we say in answer to the objec- 
tion, that indulgences are sold, and that the 
income thus derived, fills the purses of popes 
and bishops, who sell them through their sub- 
ordinates. 

We deny that indulgences were ever sold by 
the Church. We admit, that one of the eon- 



336 ON PUEGATOKY AND INDULGENCES. 

ditions to gain an indulgence was not nn- 
frequently the giving of an alms, either to the 
poor, for the propagation of the faith, or to 
build up or adorn the temples of the living 
God. "VVe also admit, that the gatherers or 
collectors of these alms, not unfrequeutly 
abused their office, and thus, indirectly at 
least, brought odium on the indulgences them- 
selves. But the Church never approved or 
connived at these abuses. Thus, the General 
Council of Lateran, held in the year 1215, to 
obviate similar abuses, ordained, that in future 
the receivers of these alms should be nomina- 
ted by the Holy See, or by the diocesan bishops. 
" Many of those who receive alms have given 
themselves out falsely for other persons, and 
have advanced certain objectionable proposi- 
tions in their sermons; we, therefore, forbid 
any to be admitted as collectors, who shall not 
have been authorized thereto by authentic let- 
ters from the Holy See or the diocesan bishops. 
And then it shall not be lawful for them to 
propose any thing but what shall be granted 
in their letters." 

The Council of Vienne, in the year 1311, 
ordered that all collectors of alms who abuse 
their trust or power, be immediately punished by 
the bishops of the diocese where they are found 



ON rUEGATOKY AND INDULGENCES. 337 

The Council of Trent seeing that these 
abuses had, unfortunately, not yet been eradi- 
cated, suppressed the office, and abolished the 
Ycry name of Questor, or collector. 

You have frequently read, or heard Catholics 
speak of a jubilee, a plenary indulgence, and a 
partial indulgence, v. of seven or ten years, 
of forty days, and the like, and you would 
perhaps wish to know the meaning of these 
expressions. Allow us, in conclusion, to ex- 
plain the nature of these indulgences. 

The word jubilee comes from the Hebrew ^ 
word, joiel, and means joy, cheerfulness, and, 
by extension, remission, liberty. Among the 
Jews the jubilee took place every fifty years, 
and its privileges were, that all the lands re- 
turned to their former owners, all debts were 
canceled, and freedom was restored to slaves. 
Among Catholics it is an extraordinary plenary 
indulgence, granted by the successors of St. 
Peter, to the whole Church ; and its special ad- 
vantages are in the extraordinary powers which 
the pontiff gives to all approved confessors, to 
absolve their penitents from certain reserved 
cases of conscience, and to commute simple vows 

A plenary indulgence is the entire remis- 
sion of all the temporal punishments which re- 
mained due to sin, after the guilt and the eter- 
29 



838 ON PUKGATORY AND INDULGENCES. 

nal punislimeiits had been forgiven by con- 
trition, confession, and absolution ; so that 
whoever should fulfil all the conditions required 
to gain a plenary indulgence, would, the mo- 
ment he gains it, be free from all the conse- 
quences of his sins, and were he to die at that 
moment, would immediately go to Heaven. 
^ A partial indulgence is the remission of a 

part only of our tempor^y indebtedness to 
divine justice for our past sins. 

An indulgence of so many years, or days, 
means not only a remission of so many years 
or days of public canonical penances, but the 
remission of as much temporary indebtedness 
as would have been gained by a faithful sub- 
misssion to, and compliance with, the canon- 
ical penances of the primitive Church. The 
better to understand this view, you should re- 
member, that during the first ages of the 
Church, she was accustomed to impose long 
and rigorous penances upon her delinquent 
children. Thus, if any one performed un- 
necessarily any servile work on Sunday, the 
individual was condemned to a fast of three 
years, on bread and water. A ten days' fast 
was imposed on those who talked in the Church 
during divine service. "Whoever was wanting 
in respect to his parents was condemned to do 



ON PTJEGATOET AND INDULGENCES. 339 

penance during three years, and during seven 
if he struck them. Backbiting was punished 
by a fast of seven days, on bread and water ; 
to bear false witness against one's neighbor, 
by a penance of seven years' duration. Usur- 
ers had three years' penance, during the first 
of which they were to fast on bread and water. 
Adultery was visited with seven or ten, and 
incest with twelve years' penance. Eevolts 
against spiritual or temporal rulers were pun- 
ished with life-long penance ; and homicide 
with standing at the Church-door daring di- 
vine service, for life, and privation of holy 
commimion till the hour of death. When 
the charity of those heroic times passed away, 
much of this disciplinary rigor gradually 
passed away with it, and other penitential 
works were enjoined and annexed, as con- 
ditions to the indulgences, which the Church 
granted to her children. Tou read, also, ol 
quarantine indulgences. They mean indul- 
gences of forty days, and have reference to the 
same canonical penances of the first ages oi 
the Church. When those indulgences are 
applied to the souls in purgatory, they sig- 
nify a remission of so much temporal in- 
debtedness or sufferings incurred by them, as 
would have been removed by the corres- 



340 els' PTJUGATOET AOT) ETOULGENCES. 

ponding canonical penances in the primitive 
Clmrch. 

Indulgences are sometimes local^ when they 
are attached to a certain place, such as a 
church, or oratory ; personalj when granted 
to certain communities, confraternities, or 
pious associations and persons only. Finally, 
real indulgences are those attached to things, 
or objects of piety, such as crosses, images, 
beads, medals, and the like. 

How tender and compassionate the care of 
Mother Church for her children ! Her watch- 
ful eye is on them, her loving heart is with 
them, from the day that she begets them unto 
Christ, till she sees them enter triumphantly 
into Heaven. By her baptism she brings them 
forth nnto Christ, and the hope of salvation ; 
by confirmation she strengthens the weakness 
of their new birth, and prepares them for the 
fearful struggle of a life beset, on all sides, with 
innumerable dangers ; by the sacrament of 
penance she heals their bruises, binds up their 
wounds, and restores them to life again. By 
holy communion she feeds their hungry souls, 
and quenches the thirst of their fevciidi con- 
cupiscences. By holy orders she preserves them 
from heresy, schism, discord, and anarchy 
among themselves. By marriage »she liux- 



ON PUEGATORY AND INDULGENCES. 34:1 

monizes carnal -witli spiritual love, and con- 
tinues to "bring forth spiritual subjects of lier 
spiritual kingdom. Finally, by her sacrament 
of extreme unction, she disarms death of its 
sting, and the grave of its indestructible 
power. To these blessings she adds others. In 
the fulness of her power, and the deep affec- 
tion of her love, she not only pardons the 
shortcomings of their ignorance and weakness, 
and the follies of their passions, when they 
truly sorrow for their crimes, but she washes 
them daily more and more, in the laver of 
Christ's saving blood, by applying to them the 
superabundant merits of her Heavenly Spouse, 
thi'ough her manifold indulgences. And she 
assists them by these indulgences, by her sacri- 
fices, and her prayers, when they themselves 
are no longer able, save through sufferings, to 
expiate the consequences of their sinfulness. 
Would to heaven, that our separated brethren 
w^ould open their eyes to these blessings and 
benefits that are to be found in the Church of 
Rome alone. Would that they were to pray 
God earnestly, and frequently, to make them 
worthy of a share in all these graces and favors ! 
" Ask and you shall receive, seek and you shall 
find, knock and it shall be opened unto you, for 

every one that asketh receiveth." (Matt. vii. 7.) 
29* 



VII. 



ON THE EEAL PEESENCE. 

" The chalice of benediction which we bless, is it not 
the communion of the blood of Christ ? And the bread 
which we break, is it not the partaking of the body of the 
Lord r 1 Cor. x. 16. 

[The authorized Protestant version reads as follows : • 
" The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the com- 
munion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we 
break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ ?"] 

This question of the Apostle St. Paul, to 
the Corinthians, it is our intention to answer 
in the present lecture. Eead the question 
again, so that you may understand its meaning. 
The Apostle asks, whether the cup of blessing, 
which, in those days, as in our own, was blessed 
by the ministers of God, is, or is not, truly, 
verily, substantially, the blood of Christ, so 
that whoever receives that cup, receives the 
blood of Christ ; and whether the bread which 
is broken, is, or is not, verily and substantially, 
the body of the Lord ; so that, whoever receives 
that consecrated bread, receives the body of 



ON THE EEAL PEESEITCE. 343 



the Lord, the very same body and blood, that 
were conceived of the Holy Ghost, in the Vir- 
gin's womb ; the same body that suffered, and 
the same blood that was shed for us, from the 
garden to Calvary. The question here put by 
the Apostle, is put oratorically. There is this 
difference between a question, properly so called, 
and the figure of speech called interrogation, 
that the former always implies or expresses 
real doubt in the mind of the questiouer, 
whereas an interrogation expressed in a nega- 
tive form, supposes not only the interrogator, 
but the interrogated to be thoroughly convinced 
of the truth or the principle, concerning which 
they are interrogated. This manner of im- 
pressing certain ulterior conclusions upon the 
mind of man, is not confined to the orator and 
logician. It is in daily use among all. Thus, 
for instance, suppose, you have laid down the 
principle for your children, that they shall never 
stay out after sunset, and it happens that one 
of them returns home at ten o'clock, or mid- 
night. What more natural for you, than to 
address your child as follows : Did not I tell 
you, my sen, that every one of the children 
should be home at sunset ? Do you ask your 
son this question by way of doubt ? By no 
means ; you appeal, by way of interrogation, 



344: ON" THE EEAL PEESENCE. 



to the conviction of liis mind concerning the 
well-known truth, in order that you may the 
better impress upon him the grievousness of his 
offence, and the necessity of avoiding it for the 
future. 

It was, evidently, in this sense that the Apos- 
tle St. Paul, put the question to the Corinthi- 
ans. He knew full well, that they were con- 
vinced of the truth of the real presence, as 
explained by him, in the next chapter ; he 
knew that they believed, as we still do, that by 
the words of blessing, or consecration, spoken 
by the priest of God, the substance of bread 
becomes the flesh, and the substance of wine 
the blood of Christ ; so that, after the words of 
consecration, there are no longer present real 
bread and wine, but only the appearances of 
bread and wine, — there are present, truly, sub- 
stantially, and really, the body and blood, to- 
gether with the soul and divinity, of Jesus 
Christ ; the same that was born of the Virgin 
Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was cruci- 
fied, died, and was buried ; the same that rose 
again from the dead, ascended into Heaven, is 
there seated at the right hand of His Father, 
and shall thence come again, to judge the liv- 
ing and the dead. But, the Apostle's object 
was to draw from this well-known truth some 



ON THE EEAL PEESEKCE. 345 



practical inferences for tlie Corinthians. Thence 
he inferred, in the first place, the necessity of 
their abstaining from things which were offered 
in sacrifice to idols; for, he concludes, " you 
cannot drink the chalice of the Lord and the 
chalice of devils ; you cannot be partakers of 
the table of the Lord, and of the table of 
devils:" (Ibid. x. 20, 21.) Secondly, he desired 
to show them (as is evident from the next chap- 
ter) the sinfulness of the abuse which some of 
them made of their Agapes, or love-feasts, in 
connection with the reception of the body and 
blood of Christ . 

"When you come, therefore, together in one 
place, it is not now to eat the Lord's supper. 
For every one taketh before his own supper 
to eat. And one indeed is hungry, and another 
is drunk." 

And he concludes : " If any man be hungry, 
let him eat at home ; that you come not to- 
gether unto judgment." 

It is in a similar sense that we ask and an- 
swer this question for ourselves personally, and 
our Catholic friends ; but for the sake of our 
separated brethren, who deny the real presence, 
we ask it in doubt : and we pledge ourselves, 
to the best of our limited ability, to clear up 
their doubt, and to convince them that the doc- 



346 



ON THE KEAL PKESENCE. 



trine of the Real Presence was always believed in 
the Eoman Catholic Church, is clearly taught 
by the Scriptures, and by the fathers and doc- 
tors of Christianity throughout the Christian 
ages. 

The Scriptural argument may be brought 
under three several heads. 

First, Christ promised to institute the Sacra- 
ment of His body and blood. 

Secondly, He instituted it. 

Thirdly, St. Paul testifies to the truth of that 
institution. 

In the first place: Our Saviour promised, 
in the plainest and most unmistakable terms, to 
institute the Sacrament of His body and blood. 
This promise is found in St. John's Gospel, 
the sixth chapter. 

Before entering upon a detailed proof of this 
proposition, it may not be amiss to remark with 
his eminence Cardinal "Wiseman, that " it was a 
practice with our Saviour, to adapt His dis- 
course to the circumstances in which he was 
placed, and, more especially,to draw them fi:om 
the miracles which He had wrought." If this 
was His practice,He could not have a "more 
appropriate and favorable opportunity to pro- 
pound the doctrine of the Eeal Presence, than 
the miracle which He had just wrought, of 



ON THE REAL PRESENCE. 347 

feeding five thousand men, without counting 
the women and children, with five barley 
loaves, and after sating the cravings of their 
hunger, gathering twelve basketfuls of frag- 
ments. But before He introduces the topic of 
the Eeal Presence, He calls their attention to 
the necessity of believing in Him. Indeed, the 
doctrine of the Eeal Presence is of its own na- 
ture so mysterious, so impervious to human 
sense, that without faith in Christ, who prom- 
ises and institutes it, no one could possibly ac- 
cept it as an article of behef necessary unto 
salvation. Hence He concludes that portion 
of His discourse by saying: " Amen, amen, I 
say unto you, he that believeth in Me, hath 
everlasting life." 

After establishing the absolute necessity of 
faith in Him, as the unerring Truth, who can 
neither be deceived Himself, nor lead others 
into error. He continues (vi. 48.), " I am the 
bread of life." 

The Jews, during Christ's discourse on faith 
in Him, had said to Him : " What sign, there- 
fore, dost Thou show that we may see and be- 
lieve Thee ! What dost Thou work ? Our 
Fathers did eat manna in thej desert, as it is 
written, He gave them Iread from heaven to 
eat. Then Jesus said to them :"Amen, amen, I 



848 ON THE KEAL PRESENCE. 



say unto you, Moses gave you not bread from 
Heaven, but My Father givetli you the true 
bread from Heaven." (Ibid 30, 32.) 

ITow, wliicli is that true bread whicli cometh 
domi from Heaven, and giveth life to the 
world ? Listen : I am the bread of life." 

Y. 49. " Your Fathers did eat manna in the 
desert, and they are dead." 

50. " This is the bread which cometh down 
from Heaven, that if any man eat of it, he may 
not die." 

51. "I am the living bread which came 
down from Heaven." 

But, Lord, why hold us any longer in sus- 
pense ? "What meanest Thou by, "I am the 
bread of life," and again, " I am the living 
bread which came down from Heaven." We 
see Thee standing before the Jews, a true, a 
veritable man, made up of flesh and blood and 
a living soul; tell us what Thou meanest when 
Thou sayest, / am the bread of life, / am the 
living bread. Look at Jesus again, look at 
Him, as He stands there, the Son of man, the 
Son of Mary, with His real flesh, and His real 
blood. His real soul, truly God, though His 
divinity is hidden under His humanity, truly 
God as well as man ; and listen : 

52. " And the Iread that / will give, is my 



ON THE EEAL PRESENCE. 349 



Hesh for the life of the world." It is no figu- 
rative, no symbolical flesh, it is His flesh, the 
very flesh, the personal flesh of the God-map, 
Jesus,— "My flesh." 

And well did the Jews understand Him to 
gpeak of His own, His real, His substantial, 
His personal flesh. For, turning Protestants 
at once, they strove among themselves, saying : 
" How can tliio man give us His flesh to eat % " 
ISTotice the emphasis — this man, the man who 
speaks, the man who stands before us — the man 
of whom they had said, a wliile before, " is not 
this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and 
mother we know % " (42.) How can He give us 
His flesh. His own, identical flesh, the flesh 
which we see, which is within the reach of our 
touch — how can tliis man give us his flesh to 
eat? 

We Catholics understand the words of Christ, 
so far as the reality of the identical flesh of 
Jesus is concerned, in precisely the same way. 
Our separated brethren understand them in a 
figurative or symbolical sense. Which of us is 
right? Left us listen to the answer of the 
Saviour. 

Previously, however, it is well to remark, 

after Cardinal Wiseman, and other controver- 

Bialists, "that whenever our Lord's hearers 
80 



350 ON THE REAL PEliSENCE. 



found difficulties, or raised objections to His 
words, from taking them in tlieir literal sense, 
while He intended them to be taken figura- 
tively, His constant practice was to explain 
them instantly, in a figurative manner, even 
though no great en^or could result from their 
being misunderstood." Thus, when Nicode- 
mus conversed with Christ, the latter, among 
other things, told him : " Amen, amen, I say 
to thee, unless a man be horn again^ he cannot 
enter the kingdom of God." Nicodemus un- 
derstood Christ literally; hence he said : "How 
can a man be born when he is old?" Our 
Saviour continues to explain His words in a 
figurative meaning, by repeating them with 
such a modification as could leave no further 
doubt of the sense in which He spoke them. 
" Amen, amen, I say to thee, unless a man be 
born again of water and the JSoly Ghost, he 
cannot enter the kingdom of God." (John, iii. 
3-5. See other examples. Matt. xvi. 6 ; xix. 
24 ; John, xv. 23 ; xi. 11 ; viii. 21 ; v. 32 ; v. 
40; vi. 33.) 

On the other hand, when His words were 
rightly understood in their literal sense, and 
they objected to the doctrine contained under 
the literal sense, it was His custom to stand to 
His words, and repeat again the very sentiment 



ON THE EEAL PEESENCE. 351 



which had given oflfence. Thus, on a certain 
occasion, our Lord said; "Abraham, your 
Father, rejoiced that he might see my day ; he 
saw it, and was glad." His hearers understood 
Him to say what He meant, — that He was as 
old as Abraham ; and mm^muring, they said : 
"Thou art not yet fifty years old, and hast 
Thou seen Abraham ? " The Saviour, because 
they understood His words rightly in their lite- 
ral sense, repeats the same, saying : " Amen, 
amen, I say unto you, before Abraham was 
made, I am." (John, viii. 57, 58. See other 
examples. Matt. ix. 2 ; John, vi. 42.) 

Assuming these facts, as the rules for inter- 
preting the sense of the words of Christ, in His 
answer, to the objection of the Jews : " How 
can this man give us His flesh to eat ? " let us 
carefully analyze the text which follows. We 
shall take the text of the authorized Protestant 
version : 

",M. Then Jesus said unto them. Amen, 
amen, I say unto you, except you eat the flesh 
of the Son of man, and drink His blood, you 
shall not have life in you." 

Does this look like a figurative presence? 
" Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man^ 
and drink Sis blood." 

Again: "Whoso eateth My flesh, anddrinketh 



352 



ON THE REAL PKESENCE. 



My blood, liath eternal life ; and I will raise 
him lip at the last day ; for My flesh is meat 
(food) indeed, and My blood is drink indeed." 

How can it be food indeed^ and drink m- 
deed^ if it be figurative only ? Surely, symbol- 
ical or figurative fiesh and blood were never 
food and drink indeed ! 

" 57. He that eateth My fiesh, and drinketh 
My blood, dwelleth in Me and I in him." 

Could there be any thing stronger than this 
indwelling of Jesus in man, and of man in Jesus ? 

" As the living Father hath sent Me, and I 
live by the Father: so he that eateth Me, 
even he shall live by Me." 

We know that the Son lives by the Father 
in the oneness of their nature, the identity of 
their essence; so, in a similar manner, as far as 
human nature can become one with the divine 
nature, he who eats the fiesh, aiid drinks the 
blood of Christ, becomes one with Christ, and 
Christ one with him. This strong expression 
evidently says much more than the mere moral 
or spiritual union, which would result from a 
figurative eating of the fiesh, and di'inking of 
the blood of Christ. 

The fact is, the language of cur separated 
brethren is grammatically, as well as theologi- 
cally, unintelligible. They tell us, that in the 



ON THE REAL PEESENCE. 353 



Lord's Supper, the flesh of Christ is eaten figur- 
atively by faith, which takes hold of the real 
body and blood of the Eedeemer, through the 
medium of their symbols, or signs, the bread 
and wine. But, who ever heard of eating or 
drinking any real substance, figuratively, or by 
faith? Suppose you invite me to a dinner- 
party, the meats of which, you announce to me, 
will consist of roast veal and mutton. I accept 
the invitation ; but, behold, when I am seated 
at the table, I find only a piece of bread. Tou 
beg me to eat my veal, and mutton. I look 
around in astonishment, and my searching eye 
seems to ask the question : " But, where are 
they?" And you answer me, seriously, and 
without a smile : " They lie before you, sir. 
The bread which is on your plate, is your 
veal, and mutton — only remember, that in eat- 
ing the bread, you must make up your mind, 
by faith, that it is meat you eat, not bread 
merely." Could you invent so absurd a farce 
as this, without laughing or smiling at your 
own silliness ? Yet this very same thing, you 
tell me, the Saviour of the world did, when, 
by promise, and even threat. He invited and 
pressed us to eat His fiesh, and drink His 
blood, which He tells us, are food and drink, 

indeed. Could any thing be more absurd. 
30* 



354: ON THE EEAL PEESENCE. 



than to put a figurative construction on words, 
£0 frequently, so emphatically repeated, which, 
of their own nature, and from the circum- 
stances under which they are spoken, convey 
no other than a literal sense to the hearer and 
the reader ? 

Let us, for a moment, suppose, that Christ 
Bpoke figuratively — how, then, should we read 
His answer to the Jews ? Our Scriptural com- 
ment would, mentally, be the following : 

Verily, verily I say unto you : except ye 
eat (figuratively) the (figurative) flesh of the 
Son of Man, and drink (figuratively) His (figu- 
rative) blood, ye have no (figurative) life in 
you. 

Whoso eateth (figuratively) My (figm^ative) 
flesh, and drinketh (figuratively) My (figurative) 
blood, hath eternal life (of course, figuratively). 

For My (figurative) flesh is (figurative) meat, 
indeed (figm^atively), and My (figurative) blood 
is (figurative) drink, indeed (figuratively). He 
that eateth (figuratively) My (figurative) fiesh, 
and drinketh (figuratively) My (figm^ative) 
blood, dwelleth (figuratively) in Me (figurative), 
and I (figurative) in him (figurative). 

As the living Father hath sent Me (why not 
add, with the Socinians, figuratively !) and 1 
live (also, according to them, figuratively) : so, 



ON THE REAL PRESENCE. 355 



he that eateth Me (figurative, figuratively) even 
he shall live (figuratively) by Me (figurative). 

May we not conclude with Horace, on an- 
other topic of absurdity, " Bisum teneatis 
amicV^ ? 

Which of you, my friends, on reading your 
own comment on the text of St. John's Gospel, 
concerning the promise of the Real Presence, 
can help smiling at its palpable silliness ? 

Still, many among you,wefear, will do as the 
Jews did in the synagogue at Capharnaum. 
Unwilling to believe, although you plainly un- 
derstand the doctrine of the Saviour, yom- only 
answer is : " This is a hard saying, and who 
can hear it ?" 

Does this saying cause the Eedeemer, finally, 
to explain Himself, in a figurative, rather than 
a literal sense ? By no means. When He 
knew in Himself, that His disciples murmured 
at it, " He said unto them, doth this ofiend 
you ? What, and if ye shall see the Son of 
Man ascend up where He was before?" As 
though He were to say : " If now, while I 
am personally before you, while you can see 
My flesh and blood, and touch it with your 
hands, you are unwilling to believe Me and My 
words; how much more diflScult will it be, 
when you will see Me no more ; when I shall 



356 



ON THE EEAL PRESENCE. 



hide My flesh and blood under the appearances 
of bread and wine; when your sight, your 
taste, yonr touch, when all your bodily senses 
will be at a loss to discover the reality of My 
Presence ; when I shall be seated at the right 
hand of My Father, in My Heavenly King- 
dom ? ' It is the spirit that quickeneth, the flesh 
profiteth nothing.' You Jews understand My 
words in the literal sense in which you should 
understand them, so far as the reality of the 
flesh and blood, w^hich I am to give you, is con- 
cerned; but you blend your carnal views with 
this spiritual and heavenly doctrine. You im- 
agine that it is dead flesh and clotted gore, such 
as you buy in the shambles of the meat-market, 
which I am to give you, and that it is to be 
eaten, after the same carnal manner, in which 
the cannibal devours human flesh: you are 
mistaken. It is the spirit which quickeneth 
that flesh : I shall be there, the living Christ, 
as you see Me now — the God-man, whom I 
proved Myself to be by My miracles ; the flesh 
alone proflteth nothing. It is My soul, My 
Divinity, together with My flesh, which are to 
quicken you, which are to raise you up, on the 
last day, and give you life eternal ; understood 
in this sense, ' the words that I spake unto you, 
are spirit and life.' " (Ibid. 64.) 



ON THE EEAL PRESENCE. 357 



In yain does our Saviour endeavor to en- 
lighten their darkened intellects, and to move 
tlieir stubborn hearts. They reject His grace, 
and "from that time many of His disciples 
went back, and walked no more with Him.' 
(Ibid. 67.) 

Was it not then, at least, high time for the 
Teacher of all truth, to undeceive His own dis- 
ciples, if they had really misunderstood His 
words ? Did He not owe it to Himself, to 
His credit, as a plain, straightforward, out- 
spoken evangelist of the new revelation, to call 
them back, and to speak to them after some 
such fashion: " See here, my friends, you have 
misunderstood my meaning : you think that I 
meant to say, that I am about to give you, and 
the world that will believe in Me, My real 
flesh to eat, and My real blood to drink. 'Not 
so. All I wished to say was, that I shall give 
you a morsel of bread, and a sip of wine, which 
will be commemorative, symbolical, figurative 
of My real flesh, and My real blood, which no 
man shall ever eat or drink, indeed, but only 
by faith, in a sign, a symbol." Is He honest 
enough to do so ? It would seem not ; for, in 
Btead of calling back His sceptical disciples. 
He turns to the Twelve, whom He had chosen 
to be the columns of His Church, the apostles, 



358 ON THE EEAL PRESENCE. 



the messengers, the evangelists of His new doc- 
tine, and He says unto tliem : " Will you, also, 
go away?" (Ibid. 68) That is to say: "Eather 
than change a word of what I have said ; rather 
than sacrifice the .least tittle of the truth which 
I have just now taught you, I am willing to 
sacrifice even you, and to choose others in your 
place, who will believe My doctrine, and My 
words." 

Then it was, that Simon Peter, who wag 
destined to be the head of those Apostles, the 
immovable rock on which Christ was to build 
His Church, against which the gates of hell 
should never prevail, anticipating the expres- 
sion of the faith of his colleagues, and, as we 
may piously suppose, dropping on his knees, 
adoring that same flesh and blood, now visible 
before his eyes, but soon to be hidden under 
the mystic veils of bread and wine, exclaimed : 
" Lord, to whom shall we go ? Thou hast the 
words of eternal life." (Ibid. 69.) 

Peter believed. He, no more than the rest, 
could fathom the depths of this stupendous 
mystery — he, no more than the Jews, could ex 
plain the how, the manner of the Peal Pres 
ence. But, it was enough for him, that Incar 
nate Wisdom had spoken : he knew that, in 
believing Christ, he could not be deceived, 



ON THE EEAL PKESENCE. 359 



thougli sense should fail to see, and reason to 
comprehend, the intrinsic nature of the mys- 
tery. Blessed wert thou, Simon Barjona ; for 
flesh and blood hath not revealed these things 
to thee, but the Father of that same Christ, 
who is in Heaven. Blessed still, all they, who, 
like Peter, have not seen, and have yet be- 
lieved- 

"What the Saviour so clearly and solemnly 
promised, He, with equal accuracy and solem- 
nity, fulfilled. 

It was the eve of His cruel passion. The 
gloom of Gethsemani and Calvary was already 
upon His soul. He spoke of His being be- 
.trayed by one of His disciples; of His not 
drinking of the fruit of the vine till He should 
drink it new in the kingdom of His Father. 
He had eaten the Passover, the Paschal lamb, 
with His Apostles. He had washed their feet, 
and now, seated once more at table, " while 
they were at supper, Jesus took bread, and 
blessed and broke, and gave to His disciples, 
and said : Take ye and eat. TMs is My lody. 
And taking the chalice. He gave thanks, and 
have to them, saying: Drink ye all of this; 
for this is My Hood of the new Testament, 
which shall be shed for many, for the remission 
of sins." (Matt. xxvi. 26-28.) 



360 



ON THE EEAL PEESENE. 



How shall we construct an argument on these 
words of the Saviour ? They are so plain, so 
simple, they carry their own conviction with 
them in the bare reading, for all those who are 
not wilfully blind, and incorrigibly obstinate. 
Eecall the fact that the Apostles had heard the 
full explanation of the words of the promise. 
They had remained faithful. "When others re- 
fused to believe, they, through Peter, had made 
an open profession of their belief in the future 
institution of the Eucharist ; all they expected 
was the fulfilment of the promise, that theii 
Master would give the/n His flesh to eat, and 
His blood to drink. That Master is now on 
the eve of His death. He is about to make 
His last will, or testament. It was now no 
time to speak in figures or in parables. A 
dying man docs not busy himself with the 
language of poetiy or rhetoric. If ever, it is 
then he speaks in plain, unvarnished prose, 
which every one can understand. Moreover, 
those who hear the Saviour on this solemn oc- 
casion, are simple, uneducated fishermen. 
They can scarcely understand the commonest 
expressions of their own language. Their rea 
son, like their speech, is untutored^ and uncul- 
tivated. They would scarcely ' think of such 
nice distinctions as the diflfereuce, in a given 



ON TEE EEAL PRESENCE. 



361 



instance, between a figurative and a literal 
expression of speecli. How mncli less were 
tliey capable of nicely sifting ont tbe certainly 
concealed figurative expression of Christ's 
tliouglit, wbicli our separated brethren appear 
to have discovered in the text. If what we 
have premised seems plausible, then I ask you, 
how, think you, did the Apostles understand the 
words of Christ above cited ? Think you they 
understood them to mean what they obviously, 
and on first hearing of them, convey to the 
mind , or the very opposite ? If the former, 
then they believed Christ to have changed the 
bread, which He broke, into the real, substantial 
flesh of His own personal body, and the wine, 
which He blessed, into His own real and per- 
sonal blood ; and, consequently, they believed 
in what we call transubstantiation, and the 
Eeal Presence. And how could they believe 
otherwise ? They had heard Him say that He 
would give them His flesh to eat^ and His blood 
to drink ; for that His flesh was food indeed, 
and His blood was drink indeed. !N^ow they 
hear Him say — take ye, eat ye ; this is My 
hody. Drink ye all of this : this is My 
'blood. True, they had heard from His hps — 
I am tlie door, the vine ; the field is the world; 
and the like figurative expressions ; but what 



362 ON THE REAL PEESENCE. 



resemblance could they discover between tliose 
obvionsly metaphorical sayings, and the words : 
this is My body ; this is My blood ? To do so 
they mnst have been immediately struck with 
the perfect parallelism not only of the words, 
but of the things. "Where is that similarity ? 
Not surely in the fact that bread was a well 
known type or figure of the human body ; for 
who ever heard that bread was assumed as an 
object of similarity or resemblance with the 
human body? Certainly, Christ's body did 
not in any imaginable way resemble bread — 
nor could bread in any possible way represent 
His body. Christ's words were, therefore, un- 
derstood by the Apostles in their literal sense. 

Moreover, Christ, as St. Luke says, added to 
the words " this is My body" which is delivered 
for you," " this is My blood which shall be 
shed for you." (Luke, xxii. 19, 20.) Did not 
Christ give His real, substantial flesh, shed his 
real, substantial, personal blood for us ? And 
yet it is that flesh, of which He says : " Take ye, 
and eat ; " it is that blood, of which he says : 
"Drink ye all of it." 

Let us illustrate the whole argument by an 
example. Suppose you are father of a family, 
and about to die. Tou wish to make your last 
will in behalf of your children. In the pre- 



ON THE EEAL PEESENCE. 



363 



sence of the notary public and two witnesses^ 
yon dictate as follows : " To my daughter Mary, 
I leave this honse with all its appi^rtenances. 
To my daughter Sarah, I leave the block oi 
houses situated on Yerona street. To my son 
John, 1 leave my farm of 150 acres, and all 
the improvements on the same." Suppose 
further that you are dead, and that your chil- 
dren go to the Probate Cornet to settle the 
question of their inheritance. There they are 
told by the judge : " Well, Mary, you doubt- 
less imagine that your father left you the real, 
substantial brick-and-mortar house in which 
he died ? " " Most certainly, your honor," re- 
plies the girl. " Yet, I am sorry to say," re- 
turns the judge, " that you are mistaken. The 
words of the last will of your father mean, that 
sometime before he fell sick, he had a photo- 
graph taken of his house, which must be some- 
where hanging or lying in a room, and that is 
the portion of your inheritance." "As to your 
share, Sarah, he left you a birdseye-view 
of the block of houses mentioned in the codicil, 
which, upon diligent search, you will probably 
find somewhere in the house." " To you, 
John, he left a landscape- view of the farm and 
its scenery, which you will find in some corner 
of the attic or the garret." Now, suppose 



864 



ON THE REAL PRESENCE. 



these children go home in search of their 
respective heii4ooms, and hug them to their 
bosoms, as a rich fortune left them by their 
departed father ; would you not say, that both 
the judge and the children, had lost their sen- 
ses ? Yet this is what our good friends have 
done. During sixteen hundred years the 
Church of Eome had never ceased to transmit 
to her dear children the legacy which she her- 
self had received on the eve of the death of her 
divine spouse ; His flesh as food. His blood as 
drink for their hungry souls. Then come Carl- 
stadt and Zwingle, and tell these children : 
" Your mother and you are mistaken : Christ, 
her spouse, did not leave her or you His real 
flesh, as food, nor His real blood, as drink ; but 
only a piece of bread and a sip of wine, as the 
images, the signs, the symbols, the figures of 
His real flesh and blood." Which, think you, 
is right, the Church or the sacramentarians ; 
Rome or Zwingle ? 

Our separated brethren . cannot but admit, 
that, whether real or figurative, Christ insti- 
tuted a new rite ; propounded, on that occasion 
a new law ; inculcated a new practice, to be 
kept by the faithful throughout all time. But, 
it would be unreasonable to suppose, that a 
wise and prudent lawgiver would make use of 



ON THE REAL PEESENCE. 365 



terms whicli would be open to cavil, on account 
of their vagueness or ambiguity. That is con- 
trary to all experience ; much, less could that 
be supposed of our Saviour, on so important a 
subject, and on so solemn an occasion. Now, 
t is evident, that the whole terminology of the 
Kedeemer, from the words of the promise to 
those of the institution, as related by the seve- 
ral evangelists, favors the Eoman Catholic, 
rather than the Protestant interpretation ; so, 
that nothing less than the most ingenious soph- 
istry could possibly construct an argument on 
those words, which would incline us to think 
that He spoke figuratively, rather than literally. 
Nor did our Divine Saviour, as on other occa- 
sions, when He was misunderstood, vouchsafe 
an explanation, which could induce His Apos- 
tles to believe the words in any other than the 
literal and obvious sense, which they, at first 
sight, convey. Every reason, therefore, com- 
pels us to believe, that Christ, at the Last Sup- 
per, gave His Apostles His real flesh to eat, and 
His real blood to dnak. 

Nor did He stop here. He, moreover, add- 
ed: "Do this for a commemoration of me." 
(LulvC, xxii. 19.) Our Lord, then, commanded 
His Apostles to do the very same thing that 

they had seen Himself do. Wliat had He 
31* 



366 



ON THE REAL PKESENCE. 



done? He had taken bread, and blessed it, 
and in tlie blessing, made it His own body, and 
given it as food to tbem. In tbe same manner, 
He bad taken tbe clialice, blessed it, and made 
it His blood, giving it to them as drink ; He 
commands them to do the very same. This^ 
namely, that you have seen Me do, do ye, for 
a commemoration of Me. In what that com- 
memoration was chiefly to consist, we are told 
by the Apostle St. Paul, who writes : " for as 
often as you shall eat this bread, and drink the 
chalice, you shall show the death of the Lord, 
until He come." (1 Cor. xii. 26.) The unbloody 
presence of Christ in the sacrament, under the 
appearances of bread and wine, was, then, to 
be a memorial, commemorative of the bloody 
presence of Jesus on the cross ; and the invis- 
ible reality of the one, the memorial of the 
visible reality of the other. 

"We now proceed to the testimony of St. 
Paul, who, though he was present neither at 
the promise nor at the institution of the sacra- 
ment, bears the most striking evidence in the 
case. Besides the text which we have already 
quoted, in which he says : " the cup of bless- 
ing which we bless, is it not the communion oi 
the blood of Christ ; and the bread which we 
break, is it not the communion of the body r*^ 



ON THE EEAL PRESEKCE. 367 

Clirist ?" lie writes as follows, in tlie eleventh 
cliapter : 

" For I have received of the Lord, that whicb 
also I delivered unto yon, that the Lord Jesns, 
the same night in which He was betrayed 
took bread, 

"And giving thanks, broke, and said : Take 
ye and eat : this is My body, which shall be 
delivered for you ; this do for the commemo- 
ration of Me. 

" In like manner, also, the chalice, after He 
had supped, saying : This chalice is the new 
Testament in My blood : this do ye, as often as 
you shall drink, for the commemoration of Me. 

"For as often as you shall eat this bread, 
and drink the chalice, you shall show the death 
of the Lord, until He come. 

" Therefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, 
or drink the chalice of the Lord unworthily, 
shall be guilty of the body and of the blood of 
the Lord. 

" But, let a man prove himself ; and so let 
him eat of that bread, and drink of the chalice. 

"For, he that eateth and drinketh unwor- 
thily, eateth and drinketh judgment [Protest 
ant version, damnation] to himself, not dis- 
cerning the body of the Lord." (1 Cor. xi. 
23-29.) 



368 



ON THE EEAL PRESENCE. 



Observe, first, that Saint Paul repeats tlie 
formula of the institution, in nearly the very 
same words in which it is recorded by the 
Evangelists. If St. Paul had understood those 
words in a figurative sense, how comes it, that 
he does not give a turn to his phraseology 
which would express that figurative sense ? 
Did not honesty require him to do it; the 
more so, as he was instructing a promiscuous 
multitude of church-members, many of whom 
were, perhaps, less capable of finding a figura- 
tive sense under these words, than were tlie 
Apostles themselves ? Moreover, he wrote after 
the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the Apos- 
tles, and he himself was imbued with the same 
Spirit, so that his understanding, now, at least, 
was fully opened to the real sense of the doc- 
trines of Christ. 

But how will you explain in a figurative 
sense, the following strong language of the 
Apostle to the Corinthians ? " Therefore, who- 
soever shall eat this bread or drink the chalice 
of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the 
body and of the blood of the Lord." How can 
any one be guilty of the body and blood of the 
Lord, if there are no such body and blood, as 
our separated brethren teach ? It is true, there 
would still be the symbols, the signs, the im 




^4 / • * 




ON THE EEAL PEESEI^CE. 



369 



ages; but will any one say tliat whoever is 
guilty of an outrage or assault upon a portrait 
or image of the king, is really and actually 
guilty of an assault upon Ms person ? Yet this 
is the strength of St. Paul's expression, which 
cannot possibly be understood, except on the 
Catholic ground, that under the appearances 
of bread and wine, Christ's body and blood are 
really, substantially and personally present. 

The same must be said of the following : 
" For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, 
eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not 
discerning the body of the Lord." (Ibid. 29.) 
What more fearful punishment could be in- 
flicted in consequence of any crime than eter- 
nal damnation ? The crime, then, of eating 
and drinking unworthily, must be an exceed- 
ingly outrageous one. But this extraordinary 
degree of guilt can scarcely be incurred in pro- 
faning the mere symbols or signs of Christ's 
body ; for then there would have been the same 
reason for punisling the Jews,if they had eaten 
the Paschal lamb or manna unworthily, since 
both these were types and symbols, even more 
striking and impressive, than those which the 
Saviour instituted. The only way, therefore, 
to account for this severity, is the reason given 
by the Apostle: because those who eat and 



370 



ON THE KEAL PEESENCE. 



drink unworthily, do not discern the body of 
the Lord : that is, they profane the body of the 
Lord, really present in the sacrament. It is 
true, that the Apostle mentions the words bread 
and wine in connection with the subject, but 
that fact is easily accounted for ; first, because 
this form of language is familiar to the penmen 
of Holy "Writ. Thus the rod of Aaron was still 
called rod after it had been changed into a 
serpent (Exod. vii. 12), and in the New Testa- 
ment the hlind are said to see. Men are called 
blind after sight is restored to them (Matt. xi. 5 ; 
Luke, viii. 22.) Secondly, we often name things 
by appeai'ances, the shape, and color, which 
they present. Thus, angels are often called 
men^ in the Scriptm-es. (Gen. x\dii. 2 ; Josh. v. 
13 ; Dan. ix. 21 ; Acts, i. 10.) These modes of 
expression are adopted in order to avoid a rep- 
etition of the same phraseology ; thus, in verse 
27, the Apostle would have written : Therefore, 
whosoever shall eat this body or drink this 
blood of the Lord, shall be guilty of the body 
and the blood of the Lord. Nor was there any 
longer the same danger, as at the institution, 
of being misunderstood. The doctrine of the 
Kea^ Presence was abeady established; its 
practice had been in existence for twenty-four 
years, so that the faithful fully understood the 



0^ THE EEAL PRESENCE. 371 



sense in whicli the Apostle used the words 
bread and wine, in connection with this mystery. 

It now remains for ns briefly to show how 
this doctrine has been uniformly taught and 
believed throughout the Catholic Church ever 
since the commencement of Christianity. St. 
Ignatius, the Martyr, who was a disciple of 
St. John the Evangelist, and bishop of Antioch, 
speaking of the Gnostics of his time, writes : 
" They abstain from the Eucharist, because they 
do not acknowledge it to be the flesh of our 
Saviour, Jesus Christ, which suflfered for our 
sins, and which the Father, by His goodness, 
resuscitated. (Epis. ad Smyrn.) 

According to this Father of the Church, it 
was a heresy, an erroi, not to believe in the 
Eeal Presence. 

St. Justin, the Philosopher, suffered martyr- 
dom at Rome, about the year 166. He says : 
" As Jesus Christ, made man by the word ot 
Gocl, took flesh for oui* salvation, in the same 
manner, we have been taught that the food 
which has been blessed by the prayer of the 
words that He spoke, and by which our blood 
and flesh, in the change, are nourished, is the 
fiesh cmd hlood of that Jesus iuGarnate. (Apol. 
i., ad imper. Anton.) St. Justin does not look 
upon the fact which he sets forth in his Apol 



372 ON THE EEAL PEESENCE. 



ogy as a mere opinion, bnt as a real dogma of 
the Clmrcli : " We have been taught." What 
that dogma was, is too plain to need any com- 
ment. 

St. Irenseus, expostulating with the heretics 
of his day, says : " How can they prove that 
the bread, over which the words of thanksgiv 
ing have been pronounced, is the hody of their 
Lord^ and the cup His hlood^'^ while they do 
not admit that He is the Son; that is, the 
Word of the Creator of the world ? (Advers. 
Hagr., lib. iv.) 

How could these men, St. Ignatius at An- 
tioch, Justin at Eome, Irenaeus at Lyons, 
agree so accurately on the same doctrine, if it 
was not the doctrine of the Universal Church ! 

St. Hilary, bishop of Poitiers, in the fourth 
century, writes: 

" There is no room to doubt the truth of 
Christ's flesh and blood ; for now, by the pro- 
fession of the Lord Himself, and according to 
our belief, it is truly flesh and truly blood." 
(De Trin., lib. viii.) 

St. Ephrem, of Edessa, says : " JELis lody^ 
by a new method, is mixed with our bodies, 
and His most pure hlood is transfused into our 
veins. He is %oholly incorporated with usJ^ 
(Hymn xxxiv., de Yirginitate.) 



ON THE REAL PRESENCE. 373 



And again : " Believe, then, and with a firm 
faitli receive the 'body and Mood of our Lord. 
Abraham placed earthly food before the celes- 
tial spirits, of which they ate. This was won- 
derful. But what Christ has done for us greatly 
exceeds this, and transcends all speech and all 
conception. To us that are in the flesh. He 
has given to eat His lody and MoodP (De Nat. 
Dei, tom. iii.) 

But nothing could be clearer than the testi- 
monies of St. Cyril, of Jerusalem, in his cate- 
chetical explanations on this subject : 

" The bread and wine, which, before the 
invocation of the adorable Trinity, were no- 
thmg but bread and wine, become, after this 
invocation, the body and blood of Christ." 
(Cat. Mystag., i., K iii.) The Eucharistic 
bread, after the invocation of the Holy Spirit, 
is no longer common bread, but the body of 
Christ." (Ibid., Cat. iii., N. iii.) 

" The doctrine of the blessed Paul alone is 

sufficient to give certain proof of the truth of 

the divine mysteries ; and you, being deemed 

worthy of them, are become one body and one 

olood with Christ. For this great Apostle 

says : That our Lord, in the same night 

wherein He was delivered, having taken bread, 

and given thanks, broke it, and gave it to His 
33 



374 



ON THE EEAL PRESENCE. 



disciples, saying to them — take and eat, this is 
My body. Afterwards lie took the cup, and 
said: take and drink, this is My blood. As 
then Christ, speaking of the bread, declared, 
and said : 'This is My hodyf who shall dare to 
doubt it ? And, as speaking of the wine. He 
positively assured us, and said : 'This is My 
Uoodf who shall doult it^ and say that it is not 
Els Hood ? " (Cat. Mystag., iv., N. i.) 

How beautifully and forcibly the same holy 
Father refutes the objection, which the unbelie- 
ver and those w^ho deny this Christian doctrine 
make to the possibility of this mystery, may be 
learned from the following passage : 

"Jesus Christ, at Cana, of Galilee, once 
changed water into wine by His will only ; and 
shall we think Him less worthy of credit, when 
He changes wine into blood ? Invited to an 
earthly marriage. He wrought that miracle ; 
and shall we hesitate to confess, that He has 
given to His children His body to eat, and His 
blood to drink? Wherefore, with all con- 
fidence, let us take the body and blood of 
Christ. For in the type or figure of bread His 
body is given to thee ; and in the type or figure 
of wine His blood is given ; that so being made 
partakers of the body and blood of Christ, you 
may become one body and one blood with 



ON THE KEAL PKESENCE. 



375' 



Him. Thus, the body and blood of Christ 
being distributed in our members, "vve become 
christaphori^ that is, we carry Christ with us ; 
and thus, as St. Peter says, we are made par- 
takers of the divine nature." (Ibid., N. iii.) 

" Wherefore I conjure you, my brethren, not 
to consider them [bread and wine] any more 
as common bread and wine, since they are the 
body and blood of Jesus Christ, according to 
His words ; and although your sense may sug- 
gest that to you, let faith confirm you. Judge 
not of the thing by your taste, but, by faith ; 
assure yourself, without the least doubt, that 
you are honored with the body and blood of 
Christ. This knowing, and of this being as- 
sured, that what appears to be bread, is not 
bread, though it be taken for bread by the 
taste, but is the body of Christ ; and that which 
appears to be wine, is not wine, though the 
taste will have it so, but is the blood of Christ." 
(Ibid., N. iv., v., vi., ix.) 

Could human language be stronger or clearer 
to prove to neophytes, to those who have just 
been received into the Church by baptism, the 
reality of Christ's flesh and blood in the Eu- 
charist ? Remember, such was the faith of the 
whole Christian Church during the fourth cen- 
tury. Who, then, are the innovators, the 



376 



ON THE REAL PRESENCE. 



Catholics, or the so-called reformers of the six- 
teenth century? Instead of believing as the 
latter did, that Christ's body is present figura- 
tively, typically, in real bread, and His blood 
figuratively and typically in real wine, those 
Christians were taught that Christ's real body 
was present in typical bread, and His blood in 
typical wine, because they believed, that after 
the words of blessing, or, as we generally ex- 
press it, after the consecration, the substance of 
the bread and wine has become the body and 
blood of Jesus Christ, so that the appearances 
only of bread and wine remain. 

Add to these testimonies, a well-known fact, 
in the history of the first four centuries of 
Christianity ; namely, the discipline of secrecy 
{discipUna arcani)^ which was practised by the 
Church in the celebration of her mysteries, es- 
pecially the mystery of the Eucharist. "What 
reason or motive could the primitive Church 
have had for celebrating, with closed doors, the 
mysteries of the altar, if she had not believed 
in the Eeal Presence ? "Why should her writers 
have been so careful in speaking of this mystery 
m such of their works as were destined to be 
made public ? Why were catechumens and un- 
believers forbidden to remain in the houses of 
assembly, when the mystic offering was about 



ON THE REAL PEESENCE. 377 

to commence ? Why did tlie Apologists of the 
Catliolic religion abstain from plainly and 
openly stating the nature of these mysteries ? 
Why did they allege, as a reason for their not 
divulging them, the command of their Master, 
that pearls should not be cast before dogs and 
swine ? Why did, even, the martyrs, when they 
were put to the rack for practising in private 
cruel and bloody crimes, such as feasting upon 
the flesh of a new-born babe, content them- 
selves with denying the accusation, without 
explaining the real nature of the practice for 
which they were condemned? Can you ac- 
count for these facts on the supposition, that 
they believed in the figurative presence only ? 
What was there so mysterious, so sacred, in 
the practice of eating a bit of bread, and drink- 
ing a sip of wine, in remembrance of the 
Saviour, who had, Himself, done so on the eve 
of His death, and ordered His followers to do 
the same ? Was there any danger of ridicule 
or calumny on that score, from their most bit- 
ter and inveterate enemies ? Was there any 
danger of persecution unto death for following 
a doctrine and a practice which had nothing in 
it contradicting sense ? N"o, my friends ; this 
secrecy, so stubbornly maintained in the midst 
of the jeers of infidel writers ; in the midst of 
82* 



378 ON THE EEAL PRESENCE. 



the most crael persecutions of tyrants, can be 
accounted for only on the hypothesis, that the 
first Christians believed in the real presence, 
whose sublime doctrines were too profound for 
carnal-minded men; whose nature was too 
sacred and holy to be exposed to the impious 
sneers of godless antagonists. 

To suppose, as some of our adversaries have 
done, that the doctrine of the Real Presence 
was gradually introduced into the Church of 
Eome, is a hypothesis opposed alike to fact 
and reason. That it is opposed to fact, we 
have already proved, by citing the testimonies 
of the leading writers of the first ages of Chris- 
tianity. Nor is there any reason for admitting 
such a supposition. 

But, if the Church of Eome had introduced 
this doctrine into her creed, how comes it that 
her enemies not only never objected this fact to 
her, but retamed the same doctrine when they 
left her bosom ? How comes it that Nestorius, 
who apostatized from Eome in the fourth cen- 
tury, carried with him the doctrines and practices 
of the Chm'ch concerning the Eeal Presence ? 
How do you account for its existence among 
the Eutychians, Jacobites, Copts, or Syrians ? 
Why did not the Greek schismatics, who quar- 
reled with Eome about trifles, remonstrate with 



ON THE EEAL PRESENCE. 



379 



her on the score of the Eeal Presence ? How 
will yon make this n-niversal agreement of all 
the chnrches, dm-ing one thousand years, tally 
v\^ith your assumption, that it was gradually in- 
troduced into the Church ? 

To introduce a new doctrine into the Church, 
especially a doctrine which, according to our 
adversaries themselves, is too deep for human 
wit, and impervious to human sense, would re- 
quire more ingenuity and craft than the keen- 
est intellect is capable of. By what process of 
sophistry could any individual, or individuals, 
however gifted, have convinced millions of 
Christians, that bread could, by a few words 
spoken over it, become the flesh, and wine the 
blood of the Son of God? JSTo matter how 
gross the ignorance of the multitude, no matter 
iiow dark the age in which they LVed, can we 
believe that there would have been no oppo- 
sition made, no remonstrance uttered against 
the novelty! Ignorance favors self-interest, 
passion, sensuality, ambition; but, what was 
ignorance to gain by the doctrine of the Eeal 
Presence ? A hidden God not only to be 
adored, but to be received in the Eucharist, 
humbles human pride, because it confounds 
human reason ; requires the sacrifice of pride 
and sensuality, as a necessary disposition, to re- 



380 ON THE EEAL PRESENCE. 



ceive Him worthily. Moreover, imivereal ig- 
norance is a cliimera. There never was an 
age, there can be none, so entirely dark as not 
to possess any light at all. Tliis is certainly 
true of the successive ages of the Christian era. 
"Would no one see — no one expose the novelty ? 
When other heresies sprang up, the learned 
doctors of the Church arose at once, and, with 
prolific pens, asserted the majesty and j)Ower of 
the ancient truth, against the abject slavery 
and weakness of error ; and was there none to 
wield that same pen against the daring inno- 
vator, who, for the first time since the founda- 
tion of Christianity, taught the mysterious 
doctrine of the Eeal Presence ? No, not one ; 
or if there was, let his name be given — his argu- 
ments made known. On the contrary, no 
sooner did Berengarius, in the eleventh cen- 
tury, deny the doctrine of the Eeal Presence, 
than the whole Christian Church rose up to 
refute and condemn his innovation. Learned 
bishops and doctors, like Lanfranc, Quitmond, 
Algerus, and others, overwhelmed him with 
argument, and no fewer than fifteen Councils, 
solemnly anathematized him. The uninter- 
rupted and undisturbed possession, therefore, 
of this doctrine by the Church of Pome dur- 
ing sixteen centmies, previous to the so-called 



ON THE KEAL PEESENCE. 381 



Reformation, is a demonstratiye argmnent, 
that the doctrine is a doctrine of Christ; 
and that, therefore, it forms a part of that 
creed which it is necessary to believe unto 
salvation. 

Luther himself, eagerly as he desired to do 
away with this doctrine, never denied the Eeal 
Presence, yea, denounced, with his nsnal vio- 
lence and vulgarity, the Zwinglians, who taught 
the figurative presence. " I clearly saw," says 
he, " how much I should thereby" (viz., by over- 
throwing the Eeal Presence) " injure Popery ; 
but I found myself caught, without any way 
of escaping ; for, the text of this Gospel was 
too plain for this purpose." (Epist. ad Argent.) 
Of the Zwinglians, he writes : " The devil 
seems to have mocked those to whom he has 
suggested a heresy so ridiculous, and contrary 
to Scripture, as that of the Zwinglians." And, 
speaking of their comments on the words, 
" this is My body, this is My blood," he re- 
marks, that " their translations and glosses on 
these texts have as much sense, as if one should 
translate the first words of Genesis: 'In the 
leginning God created Heaven and eartK— 
In the heginning the cuckoo eat the sjparrow 
and his feather s,'^^ (Def. Verb. Dom.) 

Furthermore, he calls those who deny the 



382 



ON THE EEAL PRESENCE. 



Eeal Presence, " a reprobate sect, 1 jing here- 
tics, bread-breakers, wine-drinkers, and soul- 
destroyers.'' (In Pary. Cat.) " They are in- 
devilized and superdevilized" — they have the 
devil in them, and above them. Finally, he 
devotes them all to the flames of hell. 

The authorized Catechism of the Church of 
England, declares that, "the body and blood 
of Christ are verily and indeed taken" — and re- 
ceived by the faithful in the Lord's Supper. 
But it may be said : We have changed all this ; 
we no longer believe as did Luther, or such 
lights of the Establishment as Eidley, Hooker, 
Andrew, Casaubon, Montague, Belson, Taylor, 
Forbes, Cosin, Samuel Parker, and others. 
And yet it is certain, my friends, that the truth 
of Christ's religion changeth not. "Heaven 
and earth shall pass away, but My word shall 
not pass away." " Christ — yesterday, to-day, 
and the same for ever." You must needs con- 
clude, that either Luther, and the Anglican 
Church, were wrong when they taught the Eeal 
Presence, or else, that you yourselves are wrong, 
in denying it. And, in either instance, your 
Reformation was not, and could not be, the 
work of God ; nor your pretended Christianity, 
the Christianity of Christ; for Christianity 
knows no change. 



ON THE KEAL PEESENCE. 3S3 

Here we might, strictly speaking, leave the 
matter. For, writing as we do, for Christians, 
we have appealed to such proofs of the Eeal 
Presence, as they, in virtue of their own prin- 
ciples, are bound to receive as conclusive evi- 
dence in the case. According to our sepa- 
rated brethren, the Bible is the only rule 
of the Christian's faith. We have appealed 
to that Bible for any evidence of a figura- 
tive presence in the Eucharist, In strict 
logic, the question is here at an end. Consist- 
ently with their own principles, they cannot 
claim a change of ground in the argumenta- 
tion. But consistency is a jewel, whose pre- 
cious worth our adversaries do not always 
properly value. Defeated in their encounter 
on the field of the Scriptures, they retreat into 
the byways of infidelity — into the haunts of 
sense, and the dark rocks of solitary reason. 
Conquered by the sword of the Spirit, they 
grasp the dagger of the impious. Abandoning 
Saints Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul, 
they appeal to Hobbes, Paine, Yoltaire, Dide- 
rot, Eousseau, Bretscheider, and Wegschnei- 
dcr, for weapons of attack against the Church, 
and her doctrine of the Eeal Presence. 

Boasting no longer of the Bible as their 
only guide to faith, they set up reason and the 



3S4 ON THE REAL PRESENCE. 



senses as the sole judges competent to decide 
the question of the Eucharist, and with greater 
pomp of speech than show of reason, they 
object to our doctrine as follows : 

"The phenomenal only can lead us to the 
knowledge of the real ; but the phenomena of 
the Eucharist present only bread and wine; 
therefore, the Eucharist contains but bread and 
wine." 

Stripping the objection of all the accoutre- 
ments of language, they mean to say : " Noth- 
ing is true to us but what ^ve know by the aid 
of the senses ; but by the aid of the senses, we 
discover in the Eucharist only bread and wine ; 
therefore, in truth, there are but bread and 
wine in the Eucharist." 

If our adversaries are really convinced of the 
truth of the principle laid down in the above 
premises, then I fear that logic will lead them 
further than they imagine or wish. 

Is it true, that we are not capable of coming 
to the knowledge of truth save by the aid of 
our bodily senses ; that is to say, unless we see, 
hear, taste, touch, or smell, the objects of our 
knowledge ? If so, my friends, then you must 
deny not only the doctrine of the Eeal Pres- 
ence, but the very first and fundamental doc- 
trines of Christianity itself ; then you must not 



ON THE REAL PRESENCE. 



385 



only borrow arguments from, but take side 
with the infidel against the Christian religion 
and its doctrines. Are you a Trinitarian, that 
is, do you believe in one God and three per- 
sons ? By the aid of which of your five bodily 
senses have you come to know that mystery ? 
Have you ever seen, heard, tasted, smelled, or 
touched the triune nature of the Deity? If 
not, then, according to your own showing, you 
must deny the Trinity and become a Deist. 
Do you believe in the Divinity of Jesus Christ ? 
Have you ever seen, heard, tasted, smelled, or 
touched the mystery of His incarnation? If 
not, then renounce His Divinity, and take your 
stand on the platform of the Socinian. Do 
you believe in baptism as the sacrament of re- 
generation, by which, from children of wrath, 
we become the children of God, — by which we 
pass from the state of sin to that of righteous- 
ness ? Has any one of your senses penetrated 
the mystery of that regeneration ? Not your 
eyes, for they saw at most the effusion of a cer- 
tain quantity of water upon the body, and not 
the interior cleansing or purification of the 
soul from sin. Much less did you discover 
that mystery by any one of the other bodily 
senses. You are bound to go further still, in 

virtue of your principle. Have you ever seen 
83 



386 



ON THE EEAL PEESENCE. 



God ? Have you ever heard Him, tasted Him, 
smelled Him, touched Him ? If not, then fare- 
well not only to Christianity, but to Deism, 
and profess yourself, at once, an Atheist. Hail 
infidelity, with all its fearful consequences for 
time and for eternity ! 

When or where did Christ teach that our 
senses are to be the guides to our faith ? Did 
He not rebulvc Thomas Didymus, because he 
made those senses the coaditions of his faith in 
the resurrection ? " Except I shall see in His 
hands the print of the nails, and^ict my jmgeT 
into the place of the nails, and put my hand 
into His side, I will not believe." (Jo. xx. 25.) 
And when our Saviour had allowed him the 
privilege of seeing and touching the prints of 
the nails and the wound of the side, what does 
He add : Because thou hast seen Me, Thomas, 
thou hast believed : Uessed are they that have 
not seen^ and have helievedP (Ibid. 29.) 

Our friends confound faith with knowledge. 
We are not asked to know, either in virtue of 
the testimony of our senses, or the intuitions 
or argumentative processes of reason, the na- 
tui'e of any mystery or doctrine of religion; 
but we are commanded to receive their truth 
upon the unerring testimony of the God-man, 
who can neither be deceived Himself; nor de- 



ON THE REAL PEESENCE. 



387 



ceive ns. The mysteries of faith are to be be- 
lieved by us not on the evidence of the senses 
or of reason, but on the evidence of the fact of 
their revelation. We must not ask, "Can I 
see?*' or even "Can I understand what I am 
asked to believe ?" but, " is it revealed It is 
a fact that Jesus Christ has taught those mys- 
teries. When I have convinced myself ot 
that fact, I follow the example of St. Peter : I 
bow my stubborn neck under the sweet yoke 
of faith, and I exclaim : " Lord, I believe : for 
to whom shall we go if not to Thee, who hast 
the words of eternal life?" 

" But my senses are deceived in this mystery. 
I see, taste, and touch only bread and wine ; 
and I am made to believe that there is neither 
bread nor wine, but the body and blood of 
Christ." 

Suppose, for argument's sake, that your senses 
are deceived. It would not be the first, nor 
probably the last time in your life and ex- 
perience. Are there no instances in which the 
bare testimony of your senses must be corrected 
by the dictates of your reason, enlightened by 
science ? When you judge that the oar of the 
boatman is not bent, as it appears to be, imder 
the water, do you rely for your judgment on 
the testimony of your sight only? Witnessing 



388 



ON THE EEAL PEESENCE. 



the setting of the sim, you would say that the 
king of day descends in a line with your eyes, 
while philosophy teaches you that he has sunk 
abeady several degrees below the horizon. 

Instances of the deception of the senses are 
numerous in the Scriptures. When Abraham 
entertained the three angels in the Vale of 
Mambre, and gave them to eat, were not his 
eyes deceived concerning their real nature? 
(Gen. xviii.) When Jacob wrestled with the 
angel who touched the sinew of his thigh, were 
not both his sight and touch deceived con- 
cerning the real substance of the spirit ? (Gen. 
xxxii.) When, in the field of the city of J e- 
richo, Josue saw a man standing over against 
him with a drawn sword, was he to believe the 
testimony of his eyes only, and refuse to believe 
that it was an angel? How, guided by his 
senses of sight or hearing only, could he fall on 
his face to the ground, and worshipping say : 
" What saith my Lord to Ms servant ?" ( Josue, 
V. 13, 15). Were the Jews excusable for 
not believing in the divinity of Jesus Christ, 
when their senses reported Him only as the 
carpenter's son, the son of Joseph and Mary ? 
Were not the eyes of the disciples bound, so 
that they should not know J esus, when they 
were going to Emmaus ? Did their ears per- 



ON THE EEAL PEESENCE. 389 



ceive by the sound of His voice that it was He, 
while " He expounded to them, in all the 
scriptures, the things that were concerning 
Him 2 " (Luke, xxiv. 27.) Did not Mary Mag- 
dalene see Jesus standing at the sepulchre, and 
vet knew not that it was Jesus, but believed 
Him to be the gardener ? (Jo. xx. 15.) 

In all these instances the manner of appear- 
ing was evidently different from His usual. His 
natural way, so that, till He resumed His natu- 
ral appearance, voice, etc., they did not recog- 
nize Him by the aid of their senses. And yet 
during all that time, He was substantially the 
same Jesus, who walked among them, who 
spoke to them, on other occasions. You are 
all acquainted with the Saviour's transiBgu- 
ration on mount Thabor. Suppose that the 
Apostles Peter, John, and James, had not ac- 
companied their Master on that occasion, but, 
without any previous knowledge of His pres- 
ence, had come to the mountain, while His 
garments were white like snow, and His coun- 
tenance shone like the sun ; is it probable that 
they would have recognized Him ? And yet, 
if they had been told then to make an act of 
faith in the reality of His presence on the 
mountain, could they have refused to do so 
with impunity, merely because their eyes did 



390 



ON THE EEAL PEESENCE. 



not see Jesus in His nsual natural form ? Why, 
then, should you or I refuse to believe Him 
really present, under the appearances of bread 
and wine, when we are plainly told by Him 
that He is really and truly present under the 
accidents or appearances of bread and wine? 
Is not Jesus now seated at the right hand of 
His Heavenly Father — the same Jesus who 
w^as bom of the Virgin, and died upon 
the cross ? Are you not bound to believe this 
truth as an article of the Christian faith ? Yet, 
every one of your bodily senses fails to prove 
it — faith, in this case, as in the case of the real 
presence in the sacrament, supplies the defect 
of the senses. 

But you tell me, human reason cannot un- 
derstand how it is possible, that bread and 
wine should be changed into the body and 
blood of Jesus. Do you mean to say, that we 
are to believe only what reason can comprehend 
and fathom ? Then, why do you believe any 
mystery of religion at all ? Can your reason 
understand Jiow there are three distinct per- 
sons. Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, in one and 
the same undivided and indivisible Godhead ; 
so that the Father is not the Son, nor the Son 
the Holy Ghost, nor the Holy Ghost the 
Father or the Son, and yet all three are God 



ON THE KEAL PRESENCE. 



391 



and have one and tlie same identical essence ? 
Is it more easy for reason, to understand, liow 
God drew all existing substances out of nothing, 
tlian how He changes one substance into an- 
other ? Can you explain the miraculous change 
of water into wine, at the feast of Cana in 
Galilee, more clearly and definitely than the 
change of bread into flesh, or wine into blood ? 
How do you account for the mystery of the 
incarnation, of the union of two distinct na- 
tures and wills, in one and the same hypostasis, 
or person ? How do you account for the action 
of justifying grace in the human soul; yea 
more, how do you account for the actions of 
the soul on the human body? Are not all 
these secrets, which it is not given to the hu- 
man mind to discover? And indeed, where 
would be the merit of our faith, if we could 
fathom all its objects, by the aid, either of our 
bodily senses, or the faculties of our mind? 
"We should no longer believe, but know ; and 
knowledge, as such, was never required unto 
salvation ; but faith, which, as the Apostle says, 
is " the substance of things to be hoped for ; 
the evidence of things that appear not." (Heb. 
xi. 1.) 

Our separated brethren forget that,in their anx- 
iety to refute the doctrine of the Eeal Presence, 



392 



ON THE REAL PRESENCE. 



they furnish their own coreligionists with wea 
pons which, like a two-edged sword, cut both 
ways, and prove as fatal in causing them to re- 
ject all other mysteries of faith, as to reject the 
Eeal Presence. "We acknowledge that the tes- 
timony of the senses, applied to their proper 
objectSjin a proper wayjis an infallible criterion 
of truth; and that reason, within her sphere, can 
decide witli infallible certitude, upon all truths 
that belong to that sphere ; but we deny that 
either of them was intended as the infallible 
criterion or judge of all truth. There are 
many things in Heaven and on earth, which 
man has not dreamed of in his philosophy; 
many, with the nature, the manner of which, 
he will never be acquainted, until the veil 
is withdrawn; until faith is changed into 
vision. 

Nor are our senses, properly speaking, de- 
ceived in relation to the Eeal Presence. The 
senses of men are the organs of their rational 
soul, and receive those impressions only, of 
which, by their natm-e, they are capable. The 
eye sees the shape, color, form ; the taste rel- 
ishes the sweetness, etc., of the bread and wine ; 
and they convey those impressions to the mind. 
Ordinarily speaking, the mind would thence 
infer that the sensations received from the ex- 
# ■ 



ON THE KEAL PRESENCE. 



393 



ternal qnalitieSjinnst lead her to judge the sub- 
stances to be bread and wine ; but instructed 
by faith, she corrects her judgment, and pro- 
nounces them, what they really are, the body 
and blood of Christ. Thus both have done 
their naturally appointed duty ; the senses have 
reported the outward appearances, and outward 
qualities of the substance, and the mind yield- 
ing to the higher authority of faith, has pro- 
nounced the substance flesh and blood. 

It would be ridiculous to argue from the 
exception to a general conclusion, as some of 
our adversaries do : If this is so, they tell us, 
with regard to the Eucharist, then we can never 
trust our senses nor our reason. You might as 
well say, that if you believe that Christ raised 
Lazarus from the dead, all the dead will rise 
from their graves and repeople the earth. Ex- 
ceptions do not destroy, but strengthen the 
general rule, by the very contrast whieh they 
present. 

Equally impertinent is the question, How 
can the body of Christ be present in so smaU a 
space as is occupied by a wafer, and in so many 
diiferent wafers, at the same time?'' 

Natural philosophers might answer you,that 
all the matter contained in the universe might 
be reduced to an indefinitely smaller space^ and 



394 



ON THE REAL PRESEI^CE. 



according to JSTewton, to no more than a cubic 
inch ; but we forbear recurring to the known 
laws of matter, to prove a mystery, for the 
truth of which the word of God alone is 
and ought to be sufficient evidence. When we 
speak of the Keal Presence of the body and 
blood of Jesus Christ, under the sacramental veil 
of bread and wine, we sj^eak not of a natural, but 
a miraculous, a preternatm^al presence, w^ith 
which the laws of nature have, simply, nothing 
to do. The physical impossibility cannot cer- 
tainly be greater than would be the moral im- 
possibility, that Jesus Christ should tell a lie, as 
He most evidently did, if we are to take His 
words to mean what they plainly signify to the 
mind. Nor is it necessary to allege the author- 
ity of certain modern writers, such as Robert 
Dale Owen, and others, to prove that biloca- 
tion, or the presence of the same individual in 
two places, at the same time, is not only pos- 
sible, but is proved to have been a fact ; suffice 
it to say, that the state and conditions of a 
spmtualized, or glorified body, such as Christ's 
is after His resurrection, cannot be adequately 
ludged of by the knowledge we have of the 
conditions of a body in its natural state. Cer- 
tain it is, as every Bible reader admits, that 
the same Jesus, who remains for ever seated at 



ON THE EEAL PEESENCE. 



395 



tlie right hand of His Father, appeared, at the 
Bame time, to St. Paul, on the road to Damas- 
cus, and stood by him, in the castle of Jerus- 
alem. (Acts, ix. 17 ; xxiii. 11.) What has hap- 
pened before, is not impossible now, and may 
happen in the same or another form, again. 

" But, to say the least, you do not carry 
out the whole doctrine of the Eeal Presence, 
as propounded by its divine Author, and you 
shamefully wrong the people, by withholding 
from them the cup — administering the sacra- 
ment under the appearance of bread only." 

To this we answer, that, when the Saviour 
instituted this wonderful sacrament, none but 
His Apostles were present at the Supper, and 
none but they received the Holy Communion. 
It is true, they received under both species, 
and were ordered to receive under both species. 
But this was natural and reasonable. For, by 
the words which He subjoined to the formula 
of consecration: "Do this for a commemora- 
tion of Me" (Luke, xxii. 19), He made them 
priests for ever, according to the order of Mel- 
chisedec, and commanded them to offer the 
same unbloody sacrifice, in the same manner, 
in which they had seen Him offer. As priests, 
and therefore, as sacriflcators, it was necessary 
that their sacrificial act should show the nature 



S96 ON THE EEAL PEESENCE. 



of real sacrifice. Now, sacrifice is defined to 
be the offering of a sensible thing, which, with 
mystic rites, is consecrated, and changed, by 
a lawful minister, and made to God alone, 
thereby to acknowledge His supreme dominion 
over all things. Hence, to represent, in this 
commemorative sacrifice, the real and bloody 
immolation of Jesus upon the cross, it was 
meet, that by a separate consecration and re- 
ception of the species of bread and wine, the 
real separation which had preceded, should be 
reproduced by the priest of Christ. Not so 
with the faithful. For, since the resurrection 
of Christ, His body, is impassible, and His 
blood can no longer be really separated from 
His flesh, so that, wherever His flesh is, there, 
also, is His blood; and mce versa^ wherever 
His blood is, there also is His flesh. Hence, 
whoever receives either species, receives as 
much as he who receives both ; and no wrong 
IS done the laity, by refusing them the cup, or 
the species of wine. A familiar comparison 
may help to illustrate this doctrine. Suppose 
a mother distributes a certain quantity of bread 
and wine to her children. To one of them 
she gives it in a cup ; to the other, in bread 
soaked in wiiie. Would the latter have a 
reasonable complaint against the mother on the 



ON THE EEAL PEESENCE. 397 



supposition that the same quantity was not 
given to both ? The comparison needs no ap- 
plication. He that receives the blood in the 
flesh, receives as much as he who would 
receive it apart from the flesh, and neither 
could posrsibly complain of wrong, or in- 
justice. 

Our divine Saviour promised, indeed, that He 

would give us His flesh to eat, and his blood to 

drink ; but He did not determine the manner 

in which He would do so. Hence, the same 

Jesus who said : " unless you eat the flesh of 

the Son of Man and drink His blood, you shall 

not have life in you" (John vi. 54), also said : 

he that shall eat of this bread, he shall live 

for ever." (Ibid. 59.) And He that said, " whoso 

eateth My flesh, and drinketh My blood, hath 

everlasting life," also said : "the bread which I 

will give is My flesh, for the life of the world." 

Finally, He that said : " he who eateth My 

flesh, and drinketh My blood, abideth in Me, 

and I in him," also said : " he that ^jeateth Me, 

the same also shall live by Me." ( Vide John, 

Yi., passim,) And the Apostle St. Paul writes 

(according to the Greek version, which our 

separated brethren have corrupted in their 

English translation), "Whosoever shall eat 

this bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord un- 
U 



398 ' ON THE KEAL PRESENCE. 



worthily, shall be guilty of tlie body and the 
blood of the Lord." 

In the Acts of the Apostles, chapter ii., 42, 
we read that they " were i:>ersevering in the 
doctrine of the Apostles, and in the communi- 
cation of the breaking of bread and prayer," — 
and in chapter xx., 7, " And on the first day of 
the week, when the disciples came together to 
break bread" . . . 

Yea, our Saviour Himself broke bread only 
in the castle of Emmaus, when seated at table, 
before His two disciples. (Luke, xxiv. 30, 31.) 
This much must be conceded, that, in none of 
these instances the cup is mentioned. 

Luther himself reproaches his disciple Carl- 
stadt,for having introduced the practice of com- 
municating under loth hinds. (Epist. ad Gasp. 
Gustol.) And, on another occasion (says Dr. 
Milner), he writes : If a council did ordain or 
permit both kinds, in spite of the council, we 
would take but one^ or take neither, and curse 
those who should take both." (Form. Miss. torn, 
ii., p. 384-386, apud Milner.) 

The same Reformer writes (Epist. ad Boh.) : 
"Although it may be well to use both kinds 
in the sacrament, yet Christ has comman- 
ded nothing on the subject." And again : 
" They sin not, who use but one kind, Christ 



ON THE EEAL PEESENCE. 



399 



having left this to the choice of each one." 
(Capt. Bab.) 

Several Anglican bishops, such as Mont- 
ague, Forbes, White, and others, held the doc- 
trine that it was not essential to the sacra- 
ment to receive under both kinds. 

The Calvinists of France, in their synod at 
Poitiers, in 1560, decreed thus : " The 'bread of 
oiir Lord's Supper ought to be administered to 
those who cannot drink wine^ on their making 
a protestation that they do not refrain through 
contempt.'^ (On the Lord's Supper, c. iii., p. 7., 
ibid.) 

Lastly, by separate acts of that Parliament, 
and that king, who established the Protestant 
religion in England, and, by name, communion 
in both kinds, it is provided that the latter should 
only be commonly so delivered and ministered^ 
and an exception is made, in case necessity did 
otherwise require. (Burnet's Hist, of Eeform. v. 
ii.frp. 41; Heylin, Hist, of Eeform., p. 58.) It 
is clear, therefore, that our separated brethren 
did not always believe that communion under 
both kinds is an essential part of the sacrament. 

There are natural reasons also, which must 
induce every sensible man to believe it not 
essential. 

First, Christ knew that it would, in many 



400 ON THE EEAL PKESENCE. 



instances, be very difficult to obtain as much 
wine as would be necessary for distribution. 
There are countries, where the culture of the 
grape is impossible, and whither, for want of 
easy access, esj^ecially in days gone by, com- 
merce would scarcely venture with this article. 

Secondly, This species is more exposed than 
bread, to the influences of the atmosphere, and, 
therefore, less easily preserved in that condition 
which is necessary for the respect due to tliis 
sublime mystery. 

Thirdly, It is more exposed to the wilful or 
involuntary irreverence of the receiver. It is 
more apt to spill, than bread is to crumble, or 
fall to the ground. 

Fourthly, It is more difficult to carry it to 
sick persons. 

Fifthly, There are not a few who are by 
nature so averse to wine, that they cannot pos- 
sibly receive it. 

Finally, The Church, which, from the begin- 
ning, taught the nature of this sacrament, must 
certainly also have known the manner of its 
reception. Js'ow, her teaching and her practice 
are such, as clearly to prove that she never 
looked upon communion under both kinds, as 
essential to the sacrament, but merely as a mat- 
ter of discipline, which might vary in local 



ON THE REAL PRESENCE. 



401 



Cliiirclies, and in different times and eircmn- 
stances. Her ecclesiastical historians tell ns 
that, to the sick, she administered the sacra- 
ment under the species of bread only, as in the 
case of the venerable old man Serapion, who, 
according to Eusebins (Hist. EccL, c. 44), re- 
ceived from the hands of the priest the sacred 
food under the species of bread only. 

We are told the same by St. Paulinus, of St. 
Ambrose. 

We know likewise from history, that holy 
communion was administered, during a certain 
period of the Church, to infants newly baptized, 
and they received .the species of wine only. 

In the days of persecution, when it was death 
to assemble for the purpose of celebrating the 
divine mysteries, the faithful were permitted 
to carry with them the blessed sacrament to 
their houses. But the historians of the time 
observe, that they carried with them the spe- 
cies of bread only. So did the hermits and 
monks in the desert receive under one species 
only, whenever the communion was brought to 
them from a distance. 

" But is it not unworthy the majesty of the 
God-man to lie concealed under the appearan- 
ces of bread and wine ; to be exposed to the 
neglect and contempt, railleries and insults of 



402 



ON THE EEAL PRESENCE. 



men ; yea, to see himself trodden mider foot, 
stabbed with dirks, and profaned by the very 
animals themselves ! " 

These sentiments of seeming respect for the 
dignity and sublimity of Christ's human nature 
would almost cause us to applaud the authors 
of them, were it not that they fall from lips 
wliich are the first to insult and sneer at that 
dignity in the sacrament. To draw an argu- 
ment against the Eeal Presence from the pos- 
sible indignities to which it may be exposed, is 
to assail the reality of the Incarnation and Ee- 
demption itself. Was it not unworthy the 
majesty of a God to debase Himself to the low- 
liness of a slave ; to hide both his Divinity and 
Humanity, during nine long months, in a Vir- 
gin's womb ; to be born in a stable ; to be in- 
sulted by Scribe and Pharisee ; to be scourged, 
crowned with thorns, to be nailed to an igno- 
minious cross ? Was it not possible, that the 
blood which He shed, at the pillar, or along 
the way to Calvary ; that the flesh which was 
torn piece-meal from His limbs, should be 
trampled under the feet of His impious per- 
secutors, or even lapped up by the tongue of 
vile animals ? Did He on that account inter- 
rupt the course of His cruel suffeiings ? Ah, 
no ! When he loved His own, He loved them 



ON THE EEAL PKESENCE. 



403 



till the end. So far from deeming these in- 
dignities unworthy of His nature. He foretold 
them in detail by His prophets, and loved to 
speak of them to His Apostles. What greater 
outrage could He receive in His very sacra- 
ment, than He received from one of His own 
disciples, who, at the very moment that he 
partook of the sacred species from the hands of 
His Master, was planning the means of betray- 
ing Him into the hands of His cruel enemies ? 

Finally, our adversaries charge us with idol- 
atry in worshipping and adoring a wafer, as 
they contemptuonsly call the Blessed Sacra- 
ment. 

To this Protestant objection let a Protestant 
answer. Jeremy Taylor, of the Anglican 
Church, writes as follows : " Idolatry is a for- 
saking of the true God, and giving divine 
worship to a creature, or to an idol, that is, to 
an imaginary God, who had no foundation in 
essence, or existence, and this is that kind of 
superstition, which by divines is called the su- 
perstition of an midue object. Now, it is 
evident that the object of the Catholic's adora- 
tion (that which is represented to them in their 
minds, their thoughts, their purposes and by 
which God principally, if not solely, takes 
estimate of human actions), in the Blessed 



404: 



OK THE REAL PKESEKCE. 



Sacrament, is the only True and Eternal God, 
hypos tatically jomed with His Holy Humanity, 
which humanity they believe actually present 
under the veil of sacramental signs ; and if 
they thought Him not present, they are so far 
from worshipping the bread in that case, that 
they themselves profess it idolatry to do so, 
which is a demonstration that their soul hath 
nothing in it that is idolatrical." (Liberty of 
Prophesying, sect. 20, IG.) Our separated 
brethren, in their objection, forget the real na- 
ture of our doctrine. They forget that by the 
words of consecration we believe the substance 
of the bread and wine to be changed into the 
real body and blood of Jesus Christ, which, 
united — as these to His Soul and Divinity — 
form the sole object of their worship and 
adoration. Is it idolatry to adore Jesus Christ, 
true God and true man ? 

ISTor is it an objection, that He is hidden 
under the sacramental veils, for was not Jesus 
as worthy of worship during the nine months 
that He lay hidden in the Virgin's womb, as 
He was when Ivins; in the mano;er ? Was He 
less worthy of adoration when the cloud took 
Him out of the disciples' view, than when He 
walked with them to the mountain of Olivet ? 

Moreover, this charge of idolatry implies 



ON THE REAL PKESENCE. 



405 



more than our objectors intend to express. If 
the adoration of the Blessed Sacrament is really 
an act of idolatry, then has the Chnrch of Christ 
been idolatrous from the very days of the Apos- 
tles, and " Christ has dealt with His Chnrch 
in a manner very nnbecoming His goodness, 
wliich was to leave her, for fifteen hundred 
years together, in such an error and idolatry, 
and that occasioned by His own words, as was 
never seen nor heard of in the world." (Cos- 
ter's Discourse.) 

Can you believe that the Son of God should 
have come on earth only to exchange one error 
for another, one kind of idolatry for another? 
It is blasphemy to entertain the thought. 

After all that has been said, our separated 
brethren may now, perhaps, understand what 
before seemed to them unintelligible, if not 
ridiculous. First of all, the difference between 
our, and their own public worship. "When a 
Catholic enters any one of om* churches, he has 
scarcely passed the threshold, ere the eye of his 
faith directs the eyes of his body to the altar, 
and the tabernacle, in which his Lord and Mas- 
ter dwells. His first act is a genuflection, by 
which he adores his Lord and God. On enter- 
ing his pew, he does not immediately seat him- 
Belf and glance from worshipper to worshipper, 



406 ON THE KEAL PEESENCE. 



to discover which of his friends or acquaintances 
have come to church ; much less to discover the 
peculiar fashions which make their appearance 
on the occasion, but devoutly kneeling, he con- 
tinues to adore the sole object of liis love. 
Hence the profound stillness, interrupted only 
by the solemn chant of the priest or choir, 
dm'ing the celebration of the tremendous mys- 
teries. Hence the pomp and grandeur of the 
liturgical rites, the richness of the sacerdotal 
robes, the splendor of gold, the beauty of pre- 
cious stones, the fragrance of flowers and of 
incense. 

Hence the celibacy of our clergy. Do you 
Bee that manly, noble, reverential form which 
stands at the foot of the altar, dressed in all 
the splendor of sacerdotal apparel ? He is the 
son of a merchant-prince, the heir of millions. 
Scarcely had he finished his academic course, 
when, one bright morning, in anguish, lie re- 
mained, after mass was over, laieeling in his 
pew, as if wrapped in ecstasy, and burning 
with charity. " Dear, sweet Jesus," whis- 
pered the youth, " Thou hast given me a 
heart to love. I feel the genial warmth ot 
its flame. But, oh! the objects that surround 
me, in the world, and which would gain my 
heart, are loathing and disgusting to me. I 



ON THE EEAL PRESENCE. 



407 



cannot love flesli wliicli is doomed to undergo 
the process of corruption; I cannot cherish, 
blood which boils with the heat of unhallowed 
concupiscence. And yet, my youthful heart 
loves and yearns to love. But it would love 
Thee alone. Sweet Jesus, oh, that Thou wouldst 
allow me to espouse Thee,as the only object wor- 
thy of my love ! "Would that I might satisfy my 
desire, by daily standing at Thy altar, there to 
become united, in that most pure, chaste, and 
intimate manner, in which flesh can become 
united with flesh and blood with blood ; grant 
me to minister within Thy sanctuary— make me, 
sweet Jesus, the dispenser of Thy mysteries, 
make me Thy priest forever, according to the 
order of Melchisedec." His prayer is heard, 
his vow is recorded in Heaven. Jesus has es- 
poused the noble youth as His own forever. 
Ifo, the love of Jesus in this sacrament cannot 
allow the blending of the profane, carnal, with 
His holy, virginal love, in the ministers of this 
august, this thrice Holy Sacrament. 

It is at the foot of the blessed Sacrament 
that our young maidens learned to devote 
themselves, by the most solemn and binding 
vows of chastity, poverty, and obedience, to 
the service and imitation of their beloved 
Spouse. What has taught that beautiful, uni 



40S 



ON THE REAL PRESENCE. 



versally loved, and admired daughter of a 
Senator to go and shut herself up within the 
narrow confines of a convent-cell, to breathe 
away the. fragrance of her youth in solitary 
contemplation and prayer ! Desolate, afflicted 
mother, what brought that sister of charity by 
your side, at the moment your noble, patriotic 
boy, was pressing his farewell kisses on your 
tearful cheeks — what was it made her say, in 
her ovra gentle way : " Be comforted, weep- 
ing mother — behold, here am I to act a moth- 
er's part. I shall follow your noble boy to the 
field of battle ; I too shall be found upon the 
hard-contested field. And should a fatal bul- 
let be sped from hostile gun, into his patriotic 
heart, I shall be there to extract the deadly 
missile, or close his dimming eyes in death. 
Under the open heavens — in the fetid atmos- 
phere of the hospital — whatever fate betide 
him, I shall be there to wipe away his tears, to 
staunch his bleedin^^; wounds, or prepare his 
soul for Heaven.'' "Where has she learned this 
heroic fortitude — this spirit of sacrifice ? At 
the foot of her convent-altar — at the holy table 
where her soul fed so often on the bread of 
strength, on the wine of virgins. Far away 
from that altar, exposed to danger, with only a 
blanket to wrap around her weary frame, — like 



ON THE KEAL PEESENCE. 409 



the soldier, on half rations — she regrets not the 
Bunple, yet soothing, comforts of home. The 
only loss she feels, is the absence of the daily 
sacrifice, and the frequent communions to which 
phe was accustomed in her convent home. 

Tell me, what inspired the master-mind of 
that architect, who raised yonder lofty temple 
to the name and glory of the God of Hosts ? 
"Who taught him to fling those vaulted arches, 
as if in rivalry with the Architect of the Uni- 
verse, aloft in air? Whence did he learn to 
flute and hoist those towering columns, to 
crown them with their rich and varied foliage, 
in speaking stone and marble ? From Him, 
who, however concealed, is to be present in the 
magnificent sanctuary of that temple, and to 
make it His dwelling-place among the children 
of men. 

Tell me, thou thousand-tongued organ, and 
ye thousand chorists, who blend your varied 
voices in perfect harmc-iy with that instrument 
of magic sounds, wh^2^ trained your author's 
and master's mind to this strange soul-ravishing 
melody? Who taught your Mozarts, your 
Haydns, your Cherubinis, your Le Sueurs, 
and your Lambillottes, the secret of their wond- 
rous art ? He who, although mute and silent 

in His earthy temple, sent the musical winds 
35 



410 ON THE EEAL PEE9EN0E. 



upon their noisy tour — wlio caused the stars 
to sing together — who filled the pine forest with 
the dirge-like notes of the plaintive winds — 
who caused tlie zephyrs to Avhisper to the 
flowers, and the rivulets to murmur to the 
rocks — who blent with all, as in a mighty 
fugue, the roar of the cataract, and the peal of 
the thunder ! 

To conclude : Who can tell all that our sepa- 
rated brethren have lost in losing the Ileal 
Presence ? The food of then* hungry souls — 
the drink of their thirsting hearts — their real 
comfort in afiliction — their hght in darkness — 
their counsellor in doubt — their strength in 
weakness — their shield and armor of defence, 
in danger — their hope in despondency — their 
life in death — their Jesus — their all. Oh ! that 
they, like ourselves, could take once more this 
bread from Heaven — and know how sweet is 
the Lord ; and having been their delight dur- 
ino; life, oh ! mii^ht it orove to them the sure 
pledge of everlasting life in Heaven ! 



VIIL 



HO^^OR AI^D INVOCATION OF SAINTS, 
VENERATION OF IMAGES AND RELICS. 

"Render, therefore, to aU their dues; tribute, to whom 
tribute is due: custom to whom custom: fear to whom 
fear : honor to whom honor." Rom. xiii. 7. 

Why do we honor the saints ? To answer 
this question, we must first reply to another. 
What are saints ? Saints are the spirits of the 
departed, who reign with Christ in glory. Are 
there any snch ? Who can doubt it ? If our 
separated brethren should doubt this fact, then, 
according to their principles, all those who die 
go to hell. For, according to them, there are 
but two places whither the spirits of the de- 
parted can go, after death, — Heaven and Hell. 
If none go to Heaven, then all go to Hell. This 
they will not and do not say. Hence they be- 
lieve with us, that there are saints : for nothing 
that is defiled can enter Heaven, and those 
who are not defiled with any sin or remnant ot 
ein, are just, righteous, holy, — saints. 

Now the question is, should we honor these 
saints ? Who dares deny it ? Are we not 



412 HONOB AND INYOCATION OF SAINTS: 



boTind to honor the just and holy ones of 
earth? Is not the child bound to honor its 
parents? Does not the Apostle write to the 
Romans: "Loving one another with brotherly 
love ; in honor preventing one another ?" (Kom. 
xii. 10.) But this honor which is due to others, 
is due mainly to their spirit, and terminates on 
the spirit rather than the body of those we 
honor. Thus we honor dignity, superiority, 
genius, talent, virtue, — all of wliich are quali- 
ties of, or referred to, the soul of man. "Why 
tlien should we cease to honor those same spir- 
its when they have departed this life, and en- 
tered upon tlie joys of life eternal? Does 
difference of situation, of place, take away the 
obligation, or, at least, the permission? On 
what principle ? 

Moreover, why should we not be allowed to 
do what God Himself does? God honored 
His friends exceedingly, and never more, than 
when He translates them from this valley of 
tears to His own beautiful Paradise. Why 
should we be bound to honor our parents, for 
instance, while they are with us in the flesh, 
and be obliged to cease honoring them, when 
as we hope, they are with God in Heaven? 
On what ground have they lost their right and 
we the privilege, if not the obhgation ? 



VEKEKATIO]^ OF IMAGES AOT) KELIOS. 413 

" But you, Catholics, do more than honor 
them. Yon invoke them ; you pray to them." 

So we do, and should we not? Are we 
allowed to ask one another's prayers here be- 
low ? Is a son allowed to say to his Christian 
father: Father, please pray for me? Is a 
daughter allowed to ask her mother's prayers ? 
May a member of any sect go to his minister, 
and beg of him to pray to God in his behalf? 
You answer: "Most undoubtedly, and good 
Christians do so." "Well, then, suppose that 
father, mother, minister die, and go to Heaven, 
why could you no longer ask them the same 
thing? Surely, the difference is not in the 
principle, but only in the circumstance of loca- 
tion. You tell me that if the saints could pray 
for us, they would interfere with the Mediator- 
ship of J esus Christ, of whom St. Paul writes : 
" For there is one God, and one Mediator of 
God and men ; the man Christ Jesus." (1 Tim. 
ii. 5.) But pray, why then do you ask your 
father, mother, and minister to intercede for 
you, while they and you are living? Is the 
nature of their petition different, in principle, 
while they are living, from that which they 
address to God when they are dead ? If their 
intercession interferes not with the only Me- 
diatorship and advocacy of Jesus with the Fa- 
35* 



414 HOXOE AND IX^^OCATION OF SAIXTS I 

tlier, while they are sinful sojourners in this 
vale of tears, why should it interfere in Heav- 
en? Study the case in its true light. There 
you are — here is your minister, — yonder in 
Heaven is Jesus Christ, seated at the right 
hand of Ilis Father. You say to your minis 
ter : " Reverend sir, please pray to God for me 
that I may be a true, a pious Christian." Your 
minister accepts your request. Standing be- 
tween you and your Heavenly Father, he pre- 
sents your petition to the throne of grace, and, 
as you hope, liis prayer in yom- belialf is heard. 
Has he interfered with the only Mediatorship 
of Jesus Christ ? If not, then take the other 
view of the case. The minister is now dead, 
and say that he is in Heaven. You are still 
on earth, and, addressing yourself to his de- 
parted spu'it, you make to him the same peti- 
tion. Where is the difference in the princi- 
ple ? If he could pray for you, while you were 
both on earth, without interfering with the sole 
Mediatorship of Chiist, why can he not do so 
yet, now that his spmt is in Heaven ? 

True," you say, " but the case, however, is 
different. My father, mother, and minister, 
while on earth, can hear me, but I have no 
certainty that they can hear me, when they 
are in Heaven. For, in order to hear thoso 



VENERATION OF IMAGES AND RELICS. 415 

who pray to them on earth, they should, like 
God, be present everywhere, and that would 
be absurd to suppose." 

So then, you shift the ground of your objec- 
tion from the principle which you said was in 
volved in it, to extrinsic circumstances, which 
have, properly speaking, not the slightest con- 
nection with the principle ? For it is one ques- 
tion,to ask how the saints can hear us pray, and 
quite another, to ask whether we are allowed 
to pray to the saints, and they for us. Before 
we answer this new difficulty, you must in- 
dulge us in a further explanation of the prin- 
ciple itself. 

Our separated brethren do not distinguish a 
twofold mediatorship, which, however, really 
exists. There is a mediatorship of redemption 
and salvation which belongs to Christ alone, 
and cannot possibly be shared by angel or 
saint. It is on this account that the Apostle 
St. Paul immediately subjoins to the words 
already cited, "There is one God, and one 
Mediator of God and men, the man Christ Je- 
sus, who gave Himself a rederrvption for all." 
Christ is our only Redeemer, and our only 
Mediator of redemption and salvation. 

But besides the mediatorship of redemption 
and salvation, there is another of prayer or 



4:16 HONOR AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS : 



intercession, wliicli belongs to all just men on 
earth, and the Angels and Saints in Heaven, 
in vh'tue of Avliich it is allowed them to ofler 
up their prayers to God for men, as the Coun- 
cil of Trent exi^resses it ; and consequently " it 
is good and useful, suppliantly to invoke them, 
and to have recourse to iliQir prayers, help and 
assistance, to obtain fiivors from God, tliTcnicjli 
His Son Jesus Christ, who is alone our Redeemer 
and Saviour P (Cone. Tr., sess. 25, Do Invoc.) 

Nor can we sec how the prayers of the saints 
interfere with, or are injurious to the mediator- 
ship of Jesus Christ. If we believed that the 
saints have any virtue or power of their own, 
apart from that of Jesus Christ, in granting U3 
what we petition for, then the objection would 
stand. But we do not believe so. We believe 
that Jesus alone is the Giver of all good gifts, 
and that all the saints can do, is to ask Him 
for those which we request them to ask for. 
Yea, it seems to us that, in so doing, we dou- 
bly honor the Mediatorship of the Saviour. 
For, besides our own acknowledgment, we em- 
ploy the Saint to profess, by His petition to 
the throne of grace, that Jesus is our only Me- 
diator and Eedeemer, that He alone can give 
what we asked. 

Suppose that you desired to obtain a certain 



VENEKATION OF IMAGES AND KELICS. 417 



situation in tlie service of the government, 
wliich, it is in the power of the president alone 
to give ; but that, in order to obtain it, instead 
of applying personally and directly to the pre- 
sident, you call upon a friend of yours, who is 
likewise the friend of the president, and you 
beg that mutual friend to intercede for you. 
Do you underrate the power, or even the good 
uess of the president, in employing that friend 
as intercessor? By no means. Eather you 
pay double honor to that power and its posses- 
sor. First, you acknowledge that the benefit 
you seek for can be bestowed by the president 
only, and you cause your friend to own it with 
you, when he shall lay your petition at his feet. 
The case is perfectly similar w^ith regard to 
prayers addressed to the saints and by the 
saints to God. 

That the saints do pray for us is evinced 
from the Apocalypse (ch. v. 8), w^here we read : 
" The four and twenty ancients fell down be- 
fore the Lamb, having every one of them harps, 
and golden vials full of odors, which are the 
prayers of the saints." And (ch. viii. 4) : 
" The smoke of the incense of the prayers of 
the Saints ascended up before God, from the 
hand of the Angel." 
, Judas Machabeus, relating a certain vision 





418 UONOR AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS ! 



with which he was favored, says : " Now, tho 
vision was in this manner : Onias, who had 
been highpriest . . . holding np his liands, 
prayed for all the people of the Jews . . . And 
after this there appeared also another man . . . 
and Onias, answering, said . . . This is he that 
prayeth much for the people, and for all the 
holy city, Jeremias the prophet of God." 
(2 Machab. xv. 12, 14.) And why should they 
not ? If Dives could call upon Abraham from 
the depth of hell in behalf of his brethren, why 
should not the Saints of Heaven be allowed to 
call upon their Lord in behalf of their clients ? 
Again, if the Angels of Heaven enjoy that 
privilege as is evident from Zacharias (i. 12), 
where the prophet heard an Angel praying for 
Jerusalem and the cities of Juda, saying : " O 
Lord of hosts, how long wilt thou not have 
mercy on Jerusalem, and on the cities of Judah, 
with which thou hast been angr}", " why 
should it not be a privilege shared by the 
spirits of the departed just, to do the same for 
their brethren in the flesh ? TJie more so that 
we are told by our Saviour, that such spirits 
shall be like the Angels of God, not in nature 
surely, for the nature of a human spirit will 
never be changed into the angelic, but in some, 
if not all their qualities and privileges. And, 



VENERATION OF IMAGES AND KELICS. 419 

indeed, reason enlightened by faith, • cannot 
refuse to accept this doctrine. Is not Heaven 
the possession and fruition of all real happi- 
ness, to its inhabitants. And is it not a pure, 
unalloyed happiness, without any mixture ol 
imperfection here on earth, for a mother to 
pray for her child, a friend to petition for a 
friend, and to know that these prayers are ac- 
ceptable to God, and wholesome to those who 
are prayed for ? Is that mother's spirit to be 
deprived of that pure happiness immediately 
on her entrance into the Paradise of bliss ? 

Furthermore, are we not told that while 
faith and hope shall be absorbed in vision and 
fruition (1 Cor. xiii. 8, 13), charity, w^hich is 
greater than these, never falleth away ? Has 
not that charity a twofold phase or aspect here 
below? Is not the second commandment: 
"Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself," 
equal to the first : " Thou shalt love the Lord 
thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy 
whole soul, and with thy whole mind?" 
(Matt. xxii. 37, 39.) And is not charity proved 
by works, is it not kind ? (1 Cor. xiii. 4.) 
How could the Saint prove his charity, if not 
by praying for those whom he was bound to 
love here on earth; or those who call upon 
him for help and assistance ? Nay, since cha- 



420 nONOK AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS I 



rity is perfect in Heaven, its works must prove 
tliat greater perfection by an increase of in- 
terest in our "behalf. 

Add to tliis that death, though it severs the 
bonds of the flesh, does not sever those of tlie 
spirit. Here upon earth these saints were 
united to ns in a holy fellowsliip of good works 
and prayers. They were membei^ of the same 
mystical body of Christ, His Church, of which 
He is, and will continue to be, the invisible 
head ; and is it not natural that these members 
should be mutuallv careful one for another ? " 
And that " the comely parts," which " have 
no need," should endeavour to procure for 
those that want a " more abundant honor ? " 
(1 Cor. xii. 23, 24, 25, 27.) Their change of 
state and place has not changed their fellow- 
ship with us. Otherwise, why do the creeds 
of nearly all religions profess a " Communion 
of Saints ? " Does that communion exist on 
earth only, or rather are not its golden links 
drawn closer when sanctity is croT\Tied w^ith 
its eternal reward in Heaven ? Has the lau- 
reled martyr no sympathy with the struggling 
combatant? Does the triumphant confessor 
feel no longer any interest in the still impris- 
oned soldier of the Cross? Hath the lily- 
c^o^vned virgin^ who is admitted to the nup- 



VENERATION OF IMAGES AND EELICS. 421 

tials of the bridegroom, no fellow-feeling for 
them that stand still knocking at the door of 
the banqnet hall ? 

We now proceed to the objection, that these 
Saints cannot hear ns. 

The objection supposes something which is 
absurd, namely, that there is in Heaven no 
other than physical hearing. If it does really 
suppose that, then, how can God hear onr 
prayers ? For we have always supposed that 
God has no material body, and consequently 
no physical hearing. 

How do the Angels hear us ? Not with any 
bodily ears, and yet we are taught that they 
are acquainted with the concerns of mortals 
here below. 

It is certain, that they knew the persons and 
individuals to whom they were sent. The 
angels that visited Abraham, Lot, Jacob, 
Josue, Daniel, Tobias, Mary, Joseph, and St. 
Peter, doubtless knew how to distinguish those 
individuals and their necessities from other 
persons and' individuals. Moreover, every 
guardian angel must needs know his client, 
and it is a general belief, grounded on the 
Scriptures, that every man that cometh into 
this world, has a heavenly spirit appointed him 
as his inseparable companion and protector. 
86 



i22 HONOR AXD INVOCATION OF SAINTS: 



The only question at issue, then, is ^vhether 
the saints, like tlie angels, can become ac- 
quainted with the fact that we address our 
prayers to them, and crave their interces- 
sion. 

Did not Almighty God communicate, at 
times, to Ilis friends on earth, a degree of 
knowledge which, naturally speaking, they 
could not have nor acquire? What was the 
knowledge of prophecy '{ Could they lift the 
veil from futurity and peer into the events of 
years to come, without a miraculously infused 
communication from Heaven? Was Eliseus 
present when he saw the ambush prepared for 
the king of Israel? (4 Kings, vi. 9.) Why, 
then, cannot God manifest to His friends in 
Heaven the wishes of their friends on earth ? 

Besides, we are told by our Saviour, that 
there is joy before the angels of God upon one 
sinner that doeth penance (Luke, xv. 10.) ; and 
that the departed in Heaven shall be like unto 
the angels of God : why then should not the 
latter be able to know what occurs on earth 
as well as the fonner ? We are told by the 
Apostle St. Paul (1 Cor. iv. 9), speaking of 
himself and his fellow Apostles: ''We are 
made a spectacle to the world, and to angels, 
and to men." How are they a spectacle, if the 



YENEEATIOK OF EVIAGES ANB EELICS. 423 

angels do not see or know them, and what 
concerns them ? In like manner, how would 
the departed be like to the angels, if they 
shared not this privilege with the angels ? 

How do the souls of " them that were slain 
for the word of God, and for the testimony 
which they held," cry out with a loud voice : 
" How long, O Lord (holy and true), dost thou 
not judge and revenge our blood on them that 
dwell 071 the eart/i^^ (Apoc. vi. 9, 10), if they 
were not conscious of the fact that their perse- 
cutors remained still unpunished ? And if they 
were made acquainted with the fact, why not 
with our prayers ? If to him that shall over- 
come and keep Christ's words unto the end 
(that evidently means death). He will give 
power over the nations, "and he shall rule 
them with a rod of iron ; and as the vessel of 
the potter they shall be broken, even as I have 
received from my Father" (Apoc. ii. 26-28); 
doubtless he must know the nations and the 
punishments which they deserve ; and if such 
power is given them for inflicting punishment, 
why should not power be given them to bene- 
fit those who call upon them ? 

Are we to question the power of God in this 
matter ? Does it exceed the limits of His om- 
nipotence, or is it derogatory to any of His 



424: nONOR AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS I 



attributes, to communicate sucli knowleclfi;e to 
His friends ? 

Is there no happiness in the study of nature 
and man? ^^hy, then, does the astronomer 
watch through weary nights the course of the 
Btars ? Why does the geologist undertake such 
painful and dangerous journeys to become ac- 
quainted with tlie structure of the earth ; why 
does the psychologist task liis brain with the 
difficult process of analyzing the nature of the 
human soul ? And why may it not enter into 
the ways of God to reward His faithfid ser- 
vants in His Heavenly palace, with a knowledge 
of tlicse things proportioned to their merits ? 
Is it no happiness to the mother to hear and 
know about her absent child? Why less in 
Heaven than on earth ? 

And even if we could not satisfactorily ac- 
count for the manner in which God communi- 
cates that knowledge, would it follow thence, 
that He does not or cannot communicate it at 
all ? This it were presumption and blasphemy 
to assert. 

But even the manner may be conceived to a 
certain extent. We are told by St. Paul (1 Cor. 
xiii. 12): ''We see now through a glass in an 
obscure manner, but then face to face. Kow 
I know in part, but then I shall know even aa 



VENEEATION OF IMAGES A^^D RELICS. 425 

I am known." And St. John says: "That 
when He (God) shall appear, we shall be like 
to Him, because we shall see Him as He is." 
(1 Jo. iii. 2.) Our knowledge then in Heaven 
shall be perfect, with that perfection of which 
the human mind is capable, and we shall see 
God as He is. But God, as He is, is every- 
where, and in all things, and all things subsist 
in Him. The atom that plays in the sunbeam, 
the rippling wave that catches it in its fold, all 
created things subsist in God, and God is in all 
things, as the Apostle says to the Athenians : 
" For in Him we live, and we move, and we are." 
(Acts, xiv. 28.) If then the saints see God as He 
is, they see Him in us, and us in Him, since in 
Him we live, move, and are. "What prevents 
them, therefore, from seeing the motions of our 
hearts and lips in prayer, and that everywhere, 
since God is everywhere. But whatever the 
manner may be in which God communicates 
to His saints the power of hearing our peti- 
tions, we know that he does so in fact. It is 
not for us to be searchers of majesty, lest we 
be overwhelmed by glory. (Prov. xxv. 27.) 

Remember that "great is the power of 
God— and seek not things that are too high 
for thee, and search not into things above thy 
ability: but the things that God hath com- 
36* 



426 HONOR AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS! 



manded thee, think on them always, and in 
many of His works be not cm'ious; for it is 
not necessary for thee to see with thy eyes 
those things that are hid. And the suspicion 
of them hath deceived many and hath detained 
their minds in vanity." (Eccl. iii. 21-23, 2G.) 

But is there no danger of idolatry in honor- 
ing and invoking the saints ? Does such prac- 
tice not resemble that of the heathen, who 
called upon numberless inferior deities, from 
whom they expected benefits and favors?" 

We have already defined the nature of idol- 
atry in our lecture on the Real Presence. 
Idolatry consists in giving to a creature the 
worship which is due to God alone. Do we 
do this ? With regard to the honor which is 
given by us to the saints, our catecliism teach- 
es : ^^We are to lionor saints and angels as 
God's special friends and servants, but not with 
the honor which belongs to God." And with 
regard to the prayers we address to them, the 
catechism of the Council of Trent, published in 
virtue of its decree, by order of Pope Pius Y., 
says : God and the saints are not to be prayed 
to in the same manner ; for we pray to God 
that jSe Himself would give us good things^ 
and deliver us f rom evil things ; but we beg 
of the saints because they are pleasing to God, 



YENERITION OF IMAGES AND EELTCS. 427 

that they would he our advocates^ and ob- 
tain from God what we stand in need of.'' 
(Part iy.) 

Hence our forms of prayer differ. "We say 
to God : " Have mercy on ns," " deliver ns,'^ 
" grant ns/' " save ns to the saints we say : 
" Pray for ns," " intercede for ns." And if, at 
times, the forms of prayer are identical, the 
faith which offers them is quite different. 
These forms, when addressed to God, mean, 
in the minds of those who address them, that 
He is the only source of all the favors and 
graces which are asked ; that He possesses in 
himself the benefits and blessings that are 
prayed for ; whereas, addressed to a saint, they 
mean only that, while these have them not 
themselves, as of their own, they may, as the 
special friends of God, obtain them by their 
prayers, through Jesus Christ, who alone is 
our Saviour and Redeemer. 

This made Hallam, a Protestant writer, say : 
" The invocation, of saints as held and ex- 
plained by that Church [the Eoman Catholic] 
in the Council of Trent, is sm^ely not idola- 
trous." (Constitutional Hist.) 

It was not thus the heathens honored and 
prayed to theii* inferior deities. Their worship 
terminated on the idol as a Deity, and they 



4:28 HONOR AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS : 

expected from the very deity they addressed, 
the benefits they asked for. 

Finally, observe that the Church does not 
teach that it is necessary unto salvation to pray 
to the saints. All she says is, ''That it is 
(jood and ^isefuV suppliantly to invoke them, 
and to have recourse to their prayers. And 
although it would show a disposition adverse 
to the s])irit of the Church not to do so, we 
may be true members of the Church, without 
conforming to this good and useful practice. 

With regard to pictures and images of Christ 
and of the saints, the Church teaches as fol- 
lows : " The images of Christ, of the Virgin 
mother of God, and the other saints, are to be 
kept and retained, particularly in the churches, 
and due honor and veneration is to be paid 
them, not that we believe there is any divinity 
or power in them, for which we respect them, 
or that any thing is to be asked of them, or 
that trust is to be placed in them, as the hea- 
thens of old trusted in their idols, . . . but the 
honor which we pay to images is referred to 
the originals whom they represent ; so that, 
by means of images which we kiss, and before 
which we kneel, we adore Jesus Christ, and 
venerate His saints." (Council of Trent, 
Sess. 25.) 



VENERATION OF IMAGES AND RELICS. 429 

Notwithstanding this plainest and clearest 
posssible statement of our doctrine, on the 
respect and honor due to pictures and images, 
our separated brethren have, from the begin- 
ning of the so-called Eeformation till this 
day, never ceased to misrepresent it in their 
books and from their pulpits. It is objected 
by them, that it is forbidden by the second 
(first, they should say) Commandment to make 
any images or pictures : " Thou shalt not make 
to thyself a graven thing, nor the likeness 
of any thing that is in heaven above, or in 
the earth beneath, nor of those things that 
are in the waters under the earth." (Exod. 
XX. 4.) 

We can hardly think that our separated 
brethren believe their own objections. If they 
mean to say, that by these words Almighty 
God forbids the making every and any kind of 
pictures and images, how will they reconcile 
one scripture with another ? For it is certain 
that the same Jehovah who gave this com- 
mandment, through his servant Moses, or- 
dered the same Moses to make two cherubim 
of gold on both sides of the mercy-seat 
(Exod. xxxvii. Y.) And also, the Lord said 
to him" (Moses) : " Make a brazen serpent, 
and set it up for a sign ; whosoever being 



430 HONOR AND INVOCATION OF SAINIS : 



struck shall look upon it, shall live. (Numb, 
xxi. 8.) 

Solomon, wlio, by the order of Heaven, 
built a magnificent temple to the Lord, carved 
all the avails of the temple round about with 
carved figures of cherubim and palm-trees, and 
open flowers within and without." (3 Kings, 
vi. 32, etc.) 

And so he did with the doors. (Ibid, vii.) 
And lie made a molten sea (ibid. 23), and it 
stood upon twelve oxen (ibid. 25) ; and on the 
borders that were between the ledges were 
lions, oxen, and cherubim. (Ibid. 29.) 

It is rather strange that God sho^d forbid 
the making of any likeness in heaven or on 
earth, and yet allow so many of them in His 
very temple ? 

But do our brethren themselves observe this 
commandment ? Let the traveller who has 
visited London answer this question, with re- 
gard, for instance, to Westminster Abbey, St. 
Paul's, and other churches. If our separated 
brethren have not all an image of the cross 
on their steeples, there are not a few who 
place the changeable weathercock in its stead. 
And surely, it is as much forbidden to make 
the image of a weathercock, as to make that 
of the cross itself. Enter their parlors and 



YENEEATION OF IMAGES AND KELICS. 431 

drawing-rooms. Are there no pictures on tlie 
wall ? none on tlie mantelpiece or the centre- 
table ? Open their purses. Are there no graven 
things therein? Is there a family, whose 
members scruple to have their likenesses taken 
by a painter or a photographer ? are there any 
who think it a sin, to keep and retain them in 
their houses, to carry them about, to hang 
them on their breasts, to wear them in their 
finger-rings ? 

It cannot be, therefore, that they believe that 
God forbade, absolutely and unconditionally, 
the making or engraving of any image or like- 
ness. "What, then, did He forbid ? To make 
them our gods, our idols, and to adore them, 
and serve them. Hence the commandment 
says : " Thou shalt not adore them, nor serve 
them." (Exod. xx. 5.) 

" But you Catholics adore them ; for you 
kiss them, bow your heads to them, take off 
your hats; you kneel to them; you pray to 
them." 

We never kneel or pray to any picture, 
image, or likeness whatsoever, but lefore them. 
To kneel and pray to an image would suppose 
life, energy, power, consciousness in the pic- 
ture or the image, if, namely, these acts, as the 
preposition to would seem to indicate, termi- 




132 HONOR AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS! 

nates on the image or the likeness ; but to per- 
form these same acts hefore them, Avhile they 
are expressions of respect, honor, and venera- 
tion, are not acts Avhich terminate on the pic- 
ture or likeness as such, but are, through 
them, referred to the originals whom they 
represent. Xor is this practice forbidden by 
tlic Scriptures. How, otherwise, could Joshua 
fall to the earth upon his face before the ark 
of the Lord until the eventide, he and the 
ciders of Israel, and exclaim : Lord God, 
why wouldst thou bring this people over the 
river Jordan, to deliver us into the hands ot 
the Amon'hite ?" etc. (Jos. vii. G, 7.) Thus, 
God ordered Moses and Joshua to put off their 
shoes, because the ground on which they stood 
was holy. Doubtless the respect and reverence 
which these men of God showed to the ground 
on which the Lord had stood, could not be 
idolatry — was not an act of adoration — for 
then, how could God Ilimself have command- 
ed it? 

But do not our separated brethren fall into 
the same sin of which they accuse us ? Who 
among them never kissed the portrait of his 
departed mother? "Who, whether sitting, 
standing, or kneeling, in the presence of that 
portrait, never gave way to his feelings, and 



VEKEIJATION OF IMAGES AND RELICS. 433 

soliloquized after some such manner ? " Dear- 
est mother, oh how we regret your absence 
from your children ! Who will restore you to 
your beloved ? " etc. Do you deem such a burst 
of filial love an act of idolatry ? Would you 
not answer, if the objection were made, " It is 
not that I believe the spirit of my mother 
dwells within this canvas, or lives in these 
colors; but I refer my heart to that spirit 
which lives, I trust, in heaven. To that spirit 
I breathe my prayer — to it I raise my plaintive 
voice." And why then do you blame the 
Catholic, who kneels, who weej)S, who prays be- 
fore the image of the Crucified, the Madonna, 
or his favorite Saint in heaven. 

Suppose your patriotic son stood before a 
statue of Washington, and spoke as follows: 
" Father of my country, would to Heaven 
thou couldst return to earth once more. In 
these days of civil discord and bloody war, in 
this fierce contest of social passions, would thou 
wert once more the leader of our armies, the 
counsellor of our States, the hope of all ! " 
Would you rush to your son, and, with a holy 
indignation, exclaim: "My son, O my son! 
Mummery, trumpery, idolatry, superstition ! you 
are speaking to a lifeless foim of marble, and 
you identify it with the father of your country 1 ^ 
87 



4e3'i nONOPw AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS I 



or rpvtlier, would you not admire and applaud 
his noble feelings, his truly patriotic spirit? 

Now, suppose, on the other hand, a Catho- 
lic standing or kneeling before an image of 
Christ, and praying as follows : " Sweet Jesu, 
oh grant tliat the wicked, the sinful of this, 
world, may be converted from their iniquities, 
and return to Thee in all the sincerity of re- 
pentance. Grant that virtue and justice may 
reign, where iniquity abounds!" etc. Why 
do you now become indignant, and vent your 
animosity in calling him an idolater ? Has he 
done any thing more than did your son, whose 
conduct you not only approved but applauded ? 

And would you allow us to show any dis- 
respect to the statues or portraits which rep- 
resent the loved ones among your departed 
or living friends ? AVould not a husband re- 
sent the tearing up or burning of the portrait 
of his dej^arted wife ? AVith what eye woidd 
you look upon us, if, in om* indignation against 
hero-worship, so common in our day, we were 
to brealv to pieces the statues of your favorite 
presidents or generals? What mean those 
national monuments, which, with statuary, and 
sculpture, and pompous inscriptions, ado-rn the 
public squares of the cities that witnessed the 
birth or death of the departed great?. Are 



VENERATION OF IMAGES AND EELICS : 435 

not these erected by the nation out of respect, 
gratitude, and love, and preserved from the 
same reasonable feelings? Are they not a 
part of the history of the greatness of em- 
pires, kingdoms, and republics, — a history, too, 
which all can read, the ignorant as V7ell as the 
learned ; the poor as well as the rich ? They 
are history carved in stone, sculptured in mar- 
ble, breathing on canvas. 

Who has not felt the powerful influence 
exercised by painting and sculpture upon the 
human heart ? Who can gaze upon the Cruci- 
fixion by Eubens, without experiencing a 
feeling such as came over the penitent thief, 
who hung beside the dying God-man, and ex- 
claiming with Him : " Lord, remember me, 
when Thou shalt come into Thy kingdom ! " 
(Luke, xxiii. 42.) 

Who ever cast his eye upon the sweet face 
of one of Eafiaele's or Murillo's Madonnas, 
and did not feel the worth of that spotless 
virginity, that priceless purity, which beams 
from the eyes and is wreathed in heaven-lit 
smiles around her lips ? 

On the other hand, what can the visitor of 
Westminster Abbey learn from the monuments, 
the busts, the statues, the marble tablets erect- 
ed to statesmen, admkals, generals, orators, and 



436 HONOR AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS: 



poets, along the walls or in tlie side cliapels 
of tliat once Catholic temple, adorned by our 
ancestors with memorials sacred to the sainted 
dead ? Alas ! alas ! the altars of the living 
God, the memorials of His saints are defaced, 
disfigured, or stand neglected relics of things 
tliat were ; and in their stead a new religion 
and a new priesthood have desecrated the 
house of the Lord, by introducing into its very 
sanctuary monuments and statuary raised to 
men and women, whose lives, whose deeds, 
whose writings were often a disgrace to religion 
and morality. 

After all we have said, we deem it unneces- 
sary to prove that Christianity has, from its 
earliest times, always paid a due respect and 
veneration to sacred images and pictures. The 
portraits of the Good Shepherd, represented, as 
Tertullian testifies (Book on Chastity, c. x.), on 
the chalices, the palm branch sculptured on 
tne martyi-'s tomb, the statue erected to the 
Saviour, of which Eusebius speaks (Eccl. Hist., 
b. vii.), and the portraits of the Saviour, and 
the Apostles S. Peter and S. Paul, which were 
preserved till his own day, were the work ot 
Christians in the first and second centuries, 
and prove that it was tli6 traditioTi of tits 
Apostles and Eboly Fathers which led '"'^ 



YENEEATIOIT OF IMAGES AND EELIC6« 437 

Council of Nice unanimously to decide and 
con&m, that the images of Jesus Christ, our 
Lord, were to be respected, in honor of Him 
whom they represented. The 8th General 
Council denned, ''According to the most an- 
cient tradition^ that images should be placed 
m our temples, to the end that at the sight of 
these sacred representations, they who behold 
them may transport to their prototypes their 
mind, their thoughts, and desires." (2 Can. 
Cone, c. v., vii.) 

" But do not the Catholics, especially the ig- 
norant portion of the Church, believe that there 
is some life, power, or virtue in those images 
and statues ?" 

By no means; and the Catechism which 
every child, rich and poor, lettered and unlet- 
tered, has to learn before he is admitted to 
Holy Communion, plainly tells him that he is 
forbidden "to pray to images and pictures," 
" because they have neither life nor sense to 
hear us." 

Away, then, away forever with the unjust 
calumny, and conclude with the Anglican 
bishop, Montague (Epist.), that "the pic- 
tures of Christ, of the Blessed Virgin, and oi 
the saints, may be had in houses, and placed in 
churches ; and respect and honor may be given 
37* 



4:38 HONOR AND INVi)CATION OF SAINTS : 



tlicm and witli tlie catccliism of tlie Coun- 
cil of Trent (Part iii.), ''that images are pro- 
hibited only inasmuch as they may be the 
means of transferring the worship of God to 
inanimate objects, as if the adoration given 
them were given to so many Gods." 

But you represent God the Father under the 
form of an old man, and the Holy Spirit under 
that of a dove or fierv ton^^ue, and the ima^-es 
of your Madonnas and Saints do not bear any 
resemblance to the subjects they represent. Is 
not this dangerous to the simple and unlettered 
believer 

If so, then the Scriptm'cs jre equally blama- 
ble, for they represent them thus. Daniel, for 
instance, paints Ilim as the Ancient of days 
Bcated on a throne, and before Him the books 
opened." Angels appear as men, eat and drink 
like men. And besides, is there any picture, 
even a daguerreotype, that always exactly re- 
sembles the ori2:inal ? If the Catholic thouo-ht 

o o 

that the exact representation of creatures is 
required, then, indeed, might the objection 
have some weight with us ; but such is not the 
case. The object of our veneration and honor 
is not the perfection of the likeness, the resem- 
blance of the picture to the original : it is its 
memorial nature, which, through the symbol^ 



VENERATION OF IMAGES AND RELICS. 439 

lifts lip the soul to the person symbolized. 
Images are intended to recall events, to repro- 
duce history, to stimulate imitation, etc. 

Do our adversaries suppose that the triangle, 
representing the Trinity, does actually repre- 
sent the nature of the oneness of divine essence 
in three divine persons? Do they imagine 
that the symbol of an eye shadows forth the 
real nature of the omniscience of God ? And 
yet these signs or symbols are as familiar to 
them as crosses and crucifixes, portraits and 
paintings of Madonnas and saints, are to us. 
In fine, do they require, in order that their 
children may learn geography or astronomy, 
that the wood-cuts of mountains, seas, lakes, 
rivers, sun, moon, and stars, should resemble 
in every particular, the reality of those objects 
in the universe ? 

From the honor due to pictures and images 
we pass to the respect and veneration which, 
with still greater reason, we bestow upon the 
relics of the Saints who reign w^ith God in 
heaven. This practice is sneeringly called 
honoring dead men's and women's bones. In 
reference to the relics of the Saints the Church 
teaches, "that the bodies of holy martyrs, 
and of others now living with Christ, which 
were the living members of Christ and the 



4:4:0 noXOK AND DsVOCATION OF SADTTS : 



temj)le of the Holy Ghost, by him to be raised 
up and glorified unto everlasting life, arc to be 
venerated by the foithful, througli which many 
benefits are bestowed on men by God ; so that 
they who aftirm tliat veneration and honor aix3 
not due to the rehcs of Saints, or that such 
relics and sacred monuments are uselessly 
honored by the faithful, and that the place? 
dedicated to their memories are in vain visited 
fur the sake of impetrating their aid, are ab- 
solutely to be condemned, as the Church haa 
long since condemned, and now also condemna 
them/ ' (Council of Trent, Sess. xxv.) 

In these words of the Council of Trent wo 
find, besides the doctrines, the leading motives 
which induce us to honor the earthly remains 
of the Saints. The first motive is, that they 
were the living members of Christ. The 
Church, as we have had occasion to remark be- 
fore, is a body,of which Christ, its founder, is 
the ever living head, and his followers the 
several members. As when Christ died, He 
did not cease to remain the head, so neither 
when the Saints died, did they cease to be 
members of that spiritual body. And as the 
influence of the head animates the other mem- 
bers of the body, so the respect which is due to 
the head must, with due proportion, be shown 



VENEEATION OF IMAGES AWD EELICS. 441 

to the members. The head being God as well 
as man, is to be adored, but the members, being 
divine by adoption and participation only, 
while they cannot be adored, must, neverthe- 
less, be honored and venerated according to 
the share which they had in the influence of 
the head upon the members. In the language 
of the Saviour Himself, " I am the vine, you 
the branches. Abide in me, and I in you. As 
the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, unless it 
abide in the vine, so neither can you unless 
you abide in Me. "Without Me you can do 
nothing." (St. John, xv. 5, etc.) "We honor, 
then, the relics of the Saints because of their 
intimate union with Jesus Christ; and the 
honor bestowed upon the relics of the members 
is bestowed for the sake of the head. This 
union in the Catholic is of a peculiar nature. 
He is a member of Christ's body, not merely 
through faith and the grace of justification, 
but he becomes united, through the Holy Com- 
munion, in that most intimate manner in 
which, next to the hypostatical union and that 
of the Incarnation, man can become united 
with God. Flesh with flesh, blood with blood, 
and concomitantly. Divinity with humanity. 
This union is, according to the Saviour, the 
principle at once of our resurrection and our 



4-12 nONOE AKD rJTVOCATION OF SALNTS: 



glorification in heaven. It must, therefore, be 
the principle of the respect and honor which are 
due to the instrument of tliat union. This is no 
otlier than the body of the saint ; that body, 
therefore, whether dead or alive, deserves to be 
honored for the sake of Ilim who honored it ex 
ccedingly, and promises to honor it by a glorious 
resurrection, and assumption into heaven. 

The second motive is, that those bodies 
were the teini)le of the Holy Ghost : " The 
temple of God is holy, which you are" (1 
Cor. iii. 17); 'Mcnow you not," continues the 
same Apostle, " that your members are the 
temple of the Holy Ghost, who is in you, 
whom you have from God, and you are not 
your own." (1 Cor. vi. 19.) Xow, if any man 
violates that temple, him shall God destroy. 
(Ibid. iii. 17.) The bodies of the Saints, then, 
instead of being treated with contempt, as our 
separated brethren would have ns do, should 
be respected and honored, as having once been 
the temple of that Holy Spirit who was poured 
out into their hearts, helped their infirmity, 
prayed hi the Saints and for them, with un- 
speakable groanings, and who bore testimony 
that they were the children of God. 

The thu'd motive is the futnre resurrection 
of those bodies. To raise the dead is an act of 



VENERATION OF IMAGES AND RELICS. 443 

omnipotence ; it is an honor God will bestow 
upon all, it is true, but in an especial manner 
upon His Saints. For wMle all shall rise 
again, not all shall be changed. Though the 
body of the saint " is sown in corruption, it 
shall rise in incorruption ; it is sown in dis- 
honor, it shall rise in glory ; it is sown in weak- 
ness, it shall rise in power ; it is sown an ani- 
mal body, it shall rise a spiritual body." (1 Cor. 
XV. 42, etc.) Why should we not honor the 
remains of the departed, which God will so 
greatly honor ? 

The last motive, is the immense weight of 
glory which these bodies shall share with their 
spirits in the kingdom of heaven. 

Nor is there any thing more natural, than 
that we should honor the remains of those 
whom once we honored and loved, while they 
were on earth, or who deserved our respect and 
love. True friendship, real love, are not con- 
fined to the living person who is the object of 
our love. It extends to every thing that be- 
longs to him. 

We value a watch, a ring, any object what- 
soever, for the sake of the person we loved and 
cherished, more than for their intrinsic material 
worth. So we daily read of swords of generals, 
bullets, and balls found on a celebrated battle- 



4:44 rroNOR and intocatiox of saints : 



field, yea, of furniture and clothing purchased 
at enormous rates, exhibited to visitors with 
peculiar delight, inspected and handled with 
extraordinary relish and care, and preserved 
with worshipful devotion. AVliat but this in 
born respect and reverence fur tlie relics of the 
departed, caused the Egyptian to embalm, and 
thus preserve till the latest posterity, the re- 
mains of his ancestors, sovereigns, relatives, or 
friends? AVluit but this principle, applied in 
a dillerent way, made the Greek and Roman 
l)urn the bodies of the departed, and preserve 
tiieir ashes in costly and curiously wrought 
urns? What but this same principle causes 
our separated brethren to fence in the graves 
of their relatives, and erect monuments above 
their tombs ? That love which dies with death 
is cold indeed, and scarcely deserves the name. 
Gratitude, like true love, survives the death of 
benefactors ; yea, it is not imfrequently kindled 
only when the flame of life is gone out in 
the darkness of the tomb. AVlien envy has 
quenched her torch, and jealousy closed her 
jaundiced eye, then it is that benefits bestowed 
appear in all their worth, and elicit those 
grateful feelings in the human breast, which, 
dming the benefactor's life, were suppressed 
by interest or by passion. 



VENERATION OF MAGES AND RELICS. 445 

."But, you expect favors from these relics, 
and attribute to them the power of miraculous 
cures — you imagine that the contact with, or 
touch of these dead bones, or of saints' gar- 
ments, can restore health to the sick, sight to 
the blind, hearing to the deaf, yea, life to the 
dead. And is not this superstition 

We believe, indeed, that through their in- 
strumentality God, whose power is infinite, 
can, often did, and still does bestow such 
blessings and favors. I say, through their in - 
strumentality. For, of themselves they have 
no such virtue or power. He who would be- 
lieve that any relic of any saint has such 
virtue of itself, that is to say, as bone or garment, 
would do wrong, and deserve the censure and 
condemnation which you yourself pronounce 
upon him. We believe the same of* relics as 
we do of images — that they have no special 
virtue or eflScacy of their own, but, that God, 
at times, *makes use of them as means and in- 
struments to bestow favors and graces. It was 
in this spirit that Eliseus smote the waters of 
the J ordan with the mantle of Elias, and they 
parted, and the prophet passed over. (4 Kings, 
ii. 14.) It was with this faith that a dead man 
was let down into the sepulchre of Eliseus, 
and no sooner did he touch the bones of the 
38 



44G HONOR AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS I 



prophet tlian lie revived, and stood up on his 
feet. (Ibid. xiii. 21.) 

With the same faith did the woman in the 
Gospel (Matt. ix. 20-22), wlio was troubled 
Avith an issue of blood for twelve years, come 
behind the Saviour and touch the hem of His 
trarmcnt. " For she said within herself : If I 
t^hall but touch His f^arment, I shall be healed. 
J hit Jesus, turning about, and seeing her, said : 
Take courage, daughter, thy faith hath made 
thee whole. And the woman was made whole 
from that hour.'' Observe, that the object of 
the woman's hope of being cured, wus Christ's 
garment ; on it, as on the instrument of her 
cure, did she hx the eye of her faith. She 
might, like the blind man along the way, have 
called aloud upon Jesus to bless her ; but no, 
her faith is centred on the hem of His gar- 
ment, as the instrument of the desired cure. 
"What peculiar virtue was there in the hem of 
that garment, as such ? Xone whatever, save 
what He who wore it gave to it, as to a 
medium or an instrument to heal diseases. 

" What would you think," said we, on one 
of our missions, to an intelligent young Prot- 
estant, who expressed to us his abhorrence of 
his mother-in-law's superstition, in believing 
that the relics of the Holy Cross and Saints 



VENERATION OF IMAGES AND RELICS. 447 

could be of service in the healing of diseases, 
" what would you think, sir, if any of the faith- 
ful should come with handkerchiefs and aprons, 
to touch the living body, or garments, of a holy 
minister of Christ's Church, with a full convic- 
tion, and unwavering confidence, that if these 
handkerchiefs and aprons were laid on a sick 
child, it might, through their instrumentality, 
be cured ?" " Why, sir," was his answer, " I 
would think it gross and ignorant superstition." 
" Have you read your Bible, friend ?" was our 
next question. " I have, sir," w^as the reply. 
" Well, then, please read it again, especially 
Acts, xix. 11, 12, where you find it stated : 
^And God wrought special miracles by the 
hand of Paul, so that even there were brought 
from his body to the sick, handkerchiefs and 
aprons, and the diseases departed from them, 
and the wicked spirits went out of them.' 
Again, my friend, what would you think of the 
Christian, who, seeing a holy minister of his 
Church coming up the street, would run into 
his house, to carry his sick babe, on a couch, 
into the street, so that the saintly man's 
shadow might cover the babe ; and the babe 
be healed ?" " I would judge it superstition 
still more silly." " "Well, friend, turn back to the 
Acts of the Apostles (ch. v. 14-16) : ' And the 



448 HONOPw AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS : 



multitude of men and women that believed in 
the Lord was more increased ; insomuch that 
tliey brought out the sick into the streets and 
laid them on beds and couches, that when Pe- 
ter came, his sJiadoii\ at the least, miglit over- 
shadow any of them, and they might be de- 
livered from their infirmities ; . . . who were 
all healed.' " 

Is there anymore power in the empty shadow 
of a saint passing througli the street, than in 
his bones or garments ? Observe that this su- 
perstition, as some are pleased to call it, was 
practised not by the heatlien nor the Jews, but 
by the multitude that lelieved in the Lord, 
And so ftir from rebuking them for it, St. Paul 
and St. Peter allow it without any resistance, 
and Heaven approves their faith and practice 
bv astoundini}: miracles. Miracles belono^ to 
divine power, and when wrought in approba- 
tion of the faith of the believer, are irresistible 
proofs of the truth of that faith, and of tlie 
practices dictated by it. For since the power 
of working miracles .must come from God, 
when it is exercised in approbation of any 
practice of faith, God so sanctions that prac- 
tice, that we cannot condemn it without con- 
demning Him who sanctions it. 

jSTor did this faith and these practices of the 



VENERATION OF MAGES AND EELICS. 449 

Catholic Christians cease with the death of the 
Apostles. Our divine Saviour had promised 
that they that believed in Him, the works that 
He did they also should do, and greater than 
these should they do, because He was to go to 
the Father. (John, xiv. 12.) Not that every 
man who believes would work miracles at his 
choice, for this would be tempting God, but 
that in His true Church there would always 
be chosen souls, by whom, when need was, God 
would Himself display His miraculous power, 
and that not during life only, but even after 
death. 

Hence ecclesiastical history, like the Bible, 
is full of evidences of respect shown to, and of 
miracles wrought by, the mediation of holy 
men and women, and their relics. 

Giving an account of the martyrdom of St. 
Polycarp, who was the disciple of St. John 
the Evangelist, the members of the Church of 
Smyrna write : " And so we afterwards gath- 
ered up his bones, more valued than stones of 
much price, and purer than fine gold, and laid 
them in a fitting treasure-house. Thus, assem- 
bling as we may in joy and triumph, the Lord 
shall grant us to celebrate the bu*thday of his 
martyrdom, both to the remembering of them 
who wrestled before in the cause, and the train- 
38* 



450 HONOR AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS! 



ing and preparing of tliose that sliall come 
after." (Euseb. Eccl. Hist., b. iv., cli. xv.) 

" Tlie holy blood of the martyrs is everj^here 
received," says St. Hilary, and their venera- 
ble bones daily bear witness ; while before tliem 
devils tremble, maladies are expelled, and won- 
ders wronght." (Contr. Const. Imp., n. 8.) 

St. Cyril of Jerusalem writes : " And let us 
not foolishly disbelieve, as though this liad not 
happened; for if handkerchiefs and aprons, 
which are external, when they touched the 
bodies of the sick, raised up the infirm, how 
much more should the body of tlie prophet 
raise the dead !" ((^atech. xviii., n. IG.) 

St. Ephrem teaches that " God dwells in the 
relics of the saints ; thence are they able to 
work every kind of miracle." (Vita B. Abra.) 

But it is useless to multiply testimonies on 
this head. Let us conclude the subject by re- 
gretting, from our hearts, that our separated 
brethren should have rejected so good, so pro- 
fitable, so holy and instinactive a doctrine and 
practice. What has become among them of 
that beautiful article of the creed : " I believe 
In the Communion of Saints ?" Can you be- 
lieve that death severs all the relations that ever 
existed on earth between man and man. Chris- 
tian and Christian ? Can you beheve, mothers, 



VENERATION OF IMAGES AND RELICS. 451 

that your feelings of sympathy and affection, 
and the external expression of them for your 
dearly loved but departed children, if they are 
in heaven, are without an echo in the other 
world ? Can you believe that, when in your 
distracted grief you cling to the dead, the in- 
animate form of your fondly loved child ; when 
you call upon it with many sobs and sighs ; 
when you address it as your own, dear, sweet, 
innocent, darling, little angel, that your angel 
is indifferent to your affectionate sympathy 
and sorrow ? Do you believe, my friends, that 
all the ties of love and kindred are severed by 
the hand of inexorable death, so that when the 
loved husband of your choice, and the dear 
wife of your affection, take their seats in the 
kingdom of bliss, there is suddenly a veil drawn 
over their knowledge, which makes it impossi- 
ble for them to see or hear you in spirit ? Ah, 
no ! We are too well acquainted with the heart 
of man to believe that it really admits the ex- 
istence of so cruel a law of separation and un- 
mitigated divorce. Oh, tell us not, whatever 
else may be your creed, that on this point, at 
least, your heart is not naturally Catholic, as 
well as Christian. Alas ! to what absurdities 
has not the contrary doctrine logically led! 
Instead of the moral, spiritualizing, and eleva- 



452 HONOR AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS. 



ting intercourse between the departed and the 
living, such as we read of in tlie written word 
of God and the pages of tradition, we hear and 
read of a heaven which is all material, and as 
immoral as the Olympus of the ancient Greeks 
and Itomans. The highest conception of the 
communion of the saints in heaven, with those 
on earth, is found in the theories of the demon- 
ologists of old ; and our new demigods, in the 
modern heavens, amuse themselves and their 
friends here below by overturning sofas and 
bedsteads, rapping on tables, and playing on 
guitars and banjos. According to the last de- 
velopment of these theories, we must conceive 
the inhabitants of the heavenly paradise as 
pursuing the same avocations there as they did 
here below, as tilling their spiritual fiirms, run- 
ning their spiritual saw and grist mills, making 
spiritual butter, and drinking spiritual butter- 
milk. (Judge Edmonds, vol. ii., p. 134, 135.) 

Oh I all ye blessed Angels and Saints of 
heaven, intercede for us and for om* separated 
brethi^en. Obtain for us an inciease of love 
and respect for your holiness of life, veneration 
lor yom- pictures, images, and relics, and for 
them that light which is necessary to open their 
eyes to the beauty of sanctity, and the power of 
yom* intercession in heaven. Amen. 



IX. 



ON THE HONOR AND INVOCATION OF 
THE BLESSED VIEGIN MAEY. 

" Behold ! from henceforth all generations shall call me 
blessed." Luke, i. 48. 

Is it pride, madness, or inspiration, which 
makes a yoimg maiden, scarcely sixteen years 
of age, the descendant of a royal but fallen 
family, the inhabitant of an obscure town, ex- 
claim, in the bold language of the text above 
cited, "Behold! from henceforth all genera- 
tions shall call me blessed ?" 

Pride or presumption it cannot be, for the 
words which precede the text give the Yirgin's 
humility as the reason of her bold language. 
"Because He hath regarded the humility of 
His handmaid. Behold! from henceforth 
all generations shall call me blessed !" Much 
less was it madness; for who dares blasphe- 
mously assert that the infinite Wisdom of the 
Father should have chosen a woman that was 
crazed for His beloved mother ? It was, then, 
the voice of inspiration, the voice of the Holy 



454 ON THE IIONOE AND INTOCATION 



Spirit, the voice of tlie Most High, ^vliicli in ado 
]ier exclaim: "i>eliold! from liencefortli all 
generations shall call me blessed." As the 
voice of inspiration, we must examine the 
meaning of the proj)hecy. The sense is plain 
and obvious. Mary propliesies that from that 
very day, onward tlirough the ages, all genera- 
tions shall call her blessed. To call one blessed 
is the outward expression of inward respect, 
honor, veneration, which tlie person deserves. 
Mary, then, foretells that from the day on which 
she became the mother of Christ, all genera- 
tions should continue to respect, honor, and 
venerate her as she deserves. The objective 
reason of this respect, honor, and venerati(jn 
was evidently her divine maternity, — the tact 
that she had become the mother of Christ. 

Hence, we may infer, without doing any 
violence to the text, that the full meaning of 
the prophecy is as follows : Behold, from this 
day, on which 1 am the mother of Christ, true 
God and true man, all Christian generations 
shall call me blessed. There was then to be a 
succession of Christian men and women, in all 
ages, among all nations, who fi'om the com- 
mencement of Christianity till the end of time, 
should, in the self-same manner, show" Mary 
that respect^ honor, and love which her dig- 



OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MAKY. 455 

nit J, as motlier of the Eedeemer, entitled her 
to, from that very day. Now, where are those 
Christian generations? To what Christian 
association or church do they belong ? Wliich 
among all the so-called Christian churches, has 
existed ever since the birth of Christianity, 
thronghont all ages, and among all nations, 
and consistently and uniformly honored the 
Blessed Virgin as she deserves to be honored ? 
The voice of history unhesitatingly answers : 
The Church of Eome. She, among all other 
churches, is the first and the last which till 
now has fulfilled that prophecy: she was the 
only one that could fulfill it. Born with the 
rise of Christianity, she alone has existed among 
all generations, for she alone was always 
Catholic or Universal. Hers was the only 
spiritual empire upon which the sun never set, 
and she is the only one which has always 
honored Mary according to her dignity and 
the excellence of her sublime office. Even 
those churches which rose up afterwards, and 
retained, as some of them did, a certain degree 
of respect and love for Mary, could not fulfil 
the prophecy, merely because they came too 
late. 

Take Simon Magus, Diotrephes, Ebion, Ce- 
rinthus, Ilermogenes, the Nicolaites, though 



4:50 ON THE nONOR AND INVOCATION 



they founded tlieir sects and cliurclies in the 
very days of the Apostles, they came too late, 
if it were only one year, to fulfil a prophecy 
whose fulfilment was to commence with the 
very birth of Christ. Much less could the En- 
cratites, Marcionites, Carpocratians, and the 
Gnostics of the second, the Elcesaites, Sabelli- 
ans, the Aquatics, or Manicheans of the tliird 
century, fulfil this prophecy. Moreover, none 
of tliose churches continued to exist throughout 
all ages, and none of them existed among all 
nations, even in their short-lived dav. jS^one 
of them were Catholic or Universal. With 
much more force does this reasoning apply to 
our separated brethren, whose churches were 
founded only three hundred or two hundred 
years ago. Even on the hypothesis that some 
of them have a due regard for the Immaculate 
Mother of their Redeemer, they came much 
too late to fulfill the prophecy of the Virgin. 
Sixteen centuries had passed by, before tlieir 
particular Christian churches coidd begin to 
fulfill the prophecy. Xor can any one of them 
even now fulfill it ; for none of them exist 
among all generations now living on the sur 
face of the earth. All are of their nature 
either national, or confined to a portion only 
of the wide world. Yea, what is stranger still, 



OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY. 457 

most of the modern Ckristian churclies oppugn 
the honor which is due to Mary, and rank it 
among the superstitious and idolatrous practices 
of heathendom. The Eoman Catholic Church 
alone, therefore, has fulfilled Mary's prophecy, 
which was inspired by the Holy Ghost, and so 
far, at least, proves herself the true Church of 
the Bible, and therefore of Jesus Christ. 

" But why do Eoman Catholics make so much 
of Mary; why are they so prodigal of their 
praises in her regard ? Why do they so honor 
and love her ? " 

We blush to think that such a question 
should have fallen from the pen or lips of those 
who call themselves Christians ! Om^ answer 
is, because of the example the Deity itself has 
given us of this honor, and praise, and love ; 
and because of the excellence and dignity of 
Mary as the mother of the Eedeemer. 

Is there any danger of superstition or idola- 
try in doing what the three divine persons of 
the most adorable Trinity themselves have 
done? 

How could God the Father honor any wo- 
man more highly, than by choosing her, from 
all eternity, to become the mother of his only- 
begotten Son ? This the Bible teaches us He 
did. From all eternity did He decree to make 
39 



458 ox THE nO.N'OE axd en^ocatiok 



man ; and when in His omniscience lie fore- 
saw that the man whom He would create in 
the course of time would fall, and his whole 
posterity with him, lie likewise decreed that, 
to lift him up from his degradation, and to 
restore him to life and liope again. He would 
eend His only-begotten Son into this world, 
clothe him with the garb of a slave, and in the 
flesh redeem the world. AVhile decreeing this 
mystery of His infinite condescension. He de- 
creed that Mary should be the fortunate wo- 
man of whose flesh His own AVord would take 
His flesh and become the Emmanuel, the God 
with us. She was truly the chosen one ot 
Heaven, among thousands and thousands ol 
millions. Hence it stands written, at the very 
head of the book : I will put enmity between 
thee (the serpent) and the woman, and thy 
seed and her seed ; she shall crush thy head." 
(Gen. iii. 15.) The woman here alluded to is 
no other than Mary, who, by gi^^ng birth to 
the Saviour, crushed the head of the serpent 
which had seduced Eve and brought ruin on 
our race. Hence He continues to honor her 
throughout the ages that precede the accom- 
plishment of the great event. All the prophets 
who prophesy of the Messiah, either explicitly 
or implicitly prophesy of Mary. What honor, 



OF THE BLESSED YIEGIN MAET. 459 

to prepare the world during four tliousand 
long years for tlie coming of a creature 
who was to give birth to the Creator of the 
world ! 

But, oh ! what exceedingly great honor 
for the Eternal "Word to choose Mary as His 
own mother — to make her virginal bosom His 
lonely sanctuary during nine months, to make 
the flesh and blood of Mary His own, so that 
it is no exaggeration to say, with one of the 
Fathers of the Church, that the flesh of Jesus 
is the flesh of Mary, and the blood of Jesus 
the blood of Mary ! 

To accomplish this mystery, the Holy Ghost, 
in a miraculous manner, supplies the place of 
Joseph, the husband of Mary. In vain does 
the Archangel plead the cause of Heaven be- 
fore this chaste, this humble Virgin. She will 
not consent to become the mother of her God, 
if it is to be with the loss of her virginity. 
" How shall this be done, because I know not 
man ? Fear not, Mary, for no word shall be 
unpossible with God." The Holy Spirit shall 
honor thee exceedingly. He Himself shall 
vouchsafe to become thy spouse ; He shall 
come upon thee, " and the power of the Most 
High shall overshadow thee. And therefore, 
also, the Holy which shall be born of thee shall 



460 ON THE nONOR AXD INYOCA'nON 



be called tlie Son of God." (Luke, i. 3i, 
35, 37.) 

Again, Ave honor 3Iarv on account of lier 
iiixnity and excellence as the Mother of our 
Redeemer. " Honor to Avhom honor is due," 
says tlie Apostle. That honor must be pro- 
portioned to the dignity and the excellence of 
the person honored. But among mere creatures, 
none can possibly possess a dignity greater, 
nobler, sublimcr, tlian that of Mother of God. 
Cast your eyes, we do not say over the Avliole 
world from tlie creation of Adam and Eve 
till this very day, but over the hierarchies of 
the heavenly spirits; Avhicli among them all 
can declare, rising from his throne, and stand- 
ing before the Lamb : " Thou art my Son ; I 
have brought Thee forth." Mary is the only 
one Avho can claim that privilege ; Mary, alone, 
enjoys the title of Mother of God. 

Om- brethren outside of the Church seem to 
ignore, or to forget, the real nature of the re- 
lation in which Mary stands to Jesus. Most 
of them have fallen into the heresy of Is esto- 
rius, who taught, that while Mary could ap- 
propriately be called the Mother of Christ, she 
could not, without blasphemy, be called the 
Mother of God. 

It will be well, therefore, to refresh 



OF THE BLESSED YIEGIK MAEY. 461 

memory on tlie real nature of the mystery of 
the Incarnation, and thence conclude to the 
dignity of Mary as the blessed Mother of the 
Saviour. 

St. John the Evangelist gives us an explana- 
tion of that mystery, when, in his first chapter, 
he exclaims : " In the beginning was the word, 
and the word was with God, and the word was 
God. The same was in the beginning with 
God. All things were made by Him. and 
without Him was made nothing that was 
made. And the Word was made flesh, and 
dwelt among us." (1-3, 14.) 

The same Word, therefore, who was begot- 
ten of the Father from all eternity, who had 
with Him the same divine nature — the same 
divine and undivided, as well as indivisible 
Essence — became flesh. Of whom ? Of Mary. 
He received from her, therefore, His nature of 
flesh and blood — His human nature ; so how- 
ever, that the divine and human nature, them- 
selves distinct, and unconfounded the one with 
the other, were united in one and the same 
divine Person, the Word of the Father ; and 
thus Mary became, and was truly, what she is 
said to be, the Mother of God. " Whence is 
this to me," exclaimed Elizabeth, filled with 
the Holy Ghost, " that the Mother of my Lord 
39* 



463 ox THE noxoE axd ixa^ocation 



should come to me?" (Luke, i. 43.) The 
Lord of Elizabeth was no other than God ; and 
that God had come to her with her cousin, 
who bore Him in her virginal bosom. 

It is true, that Mar}^ did not give His divine 
nature to Jesus ; that He held it exclusively 
from His heavenly Father. AVe do not wisli 
to convey tlie idea that the divine nature and 
person of tlie Word did not exist before Mary 
became the Mother of the Itcdeemer ; but we 
maintain, that since, at the conception of 
Christ, the human nature which He liad from 
Mary became united in one and the same 
Divine Person of tlie Godhead, Mary must be, 
and is rightly styled, the Mother of God. An 
example will illustrate, to some extent, the 
truth of this mystery. AVhen a mother gives 
birtli to a child, she is truly and deservedly 
called the mother of that child ; yet she did 
not create the soul of that child — the soul was 
created by God. All she formed in her bosom 
was the earthly part of his compound being. 
So, although Mary did not conceive the divine 
natm-e of the AVord, yet, because at the very 
moment she conceived, the hmnan natm'e was 
united in one and the same divine Person 
with the divine natm^e, she is tmly the Mother 
of God. As such she has no rival, no equal in 



OF THE BLESSED YTEGIN MAEY. 463 

dignity, consequently, among mere creatm-es ; 
no rival in the honor, love, and veneration 
which are due to her on that account. 

Hence the universal belief of the Church on 
this subject, till Nestorius disturbed it by his 
heresy. In the liturgy of St. James, which, 
if not composed by the Apostle, is certainly 
very ancient, we read this invocation : " Most 
Holy, most Glorious, Immaculate, etc., Mother 
of God^ and ever Virgin." 

In the liturgy of St. Mark the Evangelist, 
we find : " Most Holy, Immaculate, and Blessed 
Mother of God^ and ever Virgin Mary." 

In those of St. Basil, of Alexandria, and 
Rome, she receives the same appellation. 

St. Athanasius exclaims : " Queen and 3f oth- 
er of God intercede for us." (Serm. in An- 
nunt.) 

St. Ephrem prays thus: "We fly to Thy 
patronage, Holy Mother of God." (Serm. de 
Laud. B. M. V.) 

St. Augustine says, similarly, "Holy and 
Immaculate Virgin Mary, Mother of God our 
Saviour Jesus Christ, deign to intercede in my 
behalf before Him whose temple Thou hast 
deserved to be." (Med. ch. xl.) 

Mary, then, occupies a special position of 
dignity and office among all other creatures, 



4:6i OX TnE HONOR AXB INVOCATION 



hence tlie special honor which is due to her, 
and which she receives from ns. 

Iler character, her virtues, her lioliness, were 
imdonbtedly in keeping with her prerogative. 
And these constitute a new claim to our respect 
and veneration. The title of maternity is of 
itself a claim to the respect and filial piety of a 
mother's children, Lut when to these she adds 
genius, or talent, virtue, and sanctity in an 
eminent degree, that mother's claim on the 
honor and love of her children increases in 
proportion to the perfection of these qualities. 
That Mary must have been ])re-eminent in 
every prerogative of nature and of grace, we 
shall scarcely dare to doubt, when we reflect 
that she became the Mother of 11 im who had 
it in His power to bestow all these special 
fovors. There was, among many other marks 
of distinction, this difference between the ma- 
ternity of Mary and that of other women ; that 
her Son was at the same time her Creator. 
He could, therefore, make her all she deserved 
to be, all He wished her to be ; yes, we ven- 
tm-e to say, He made her all she should be to 
be worthy of Himself. If any one of us had 
had it in his power to create and to make his 
own mother whatever he could wish her to be, 
what do you think he would have made her ? 



OF THE BLESSED VIEGIN" MAEY. 465 

According to the body, beautiful and lovely 
among all other women; according to the 
spirit, endowed with the highest genius and 
the most upright heart. According to grace, 
spotless, pure, free from the shadow of sin. 
Do you not suppose that Jesus did all this for 
His mother? Hence, for instance, our firm 
belief in her Immaculate Conception, which 
.does not mean, as some of our Protestant con- 
temporaries seem to have understood our doc- 
trine, that Mary was conceived, like her Son 
Jesus, without the knowledge of man, but that 
by a special privilege and grace of the Omnip- 
otent God, in virtue of the merits of Jesus 
Christ, the Saviour of mankind, she was, at 
the first instant of her conception, preserved 
free from all stain of original sin. And, in- 
deed, how could He, who was to take up His 
abode in her chaste bosom, dwell in a taberna- 
cle, defiled by the least taint of sin? How 
could He who came to destroy sin, have taken 
flesh of sinful flesh, without in some manner 
contaminating His own ? How could He allow 
Satan, whose empire on earth He came to over 
throw, have it in his power to say : " The tem- 
ple in which you dwelled dming nine monthe 
was once my own. The flesh which you re- 
ceived from your mother, was once under my 



iG6 ON THE IIOXOR AKD INVOCAllOJSf 

control. She wlio gave you life ^vas once my 
blave." JSTever could Christ permit such taunts 
to be true. Hence, ^vliile all utliers came un- 
der the law, Mary alone was exemj^ted. Like 
E.-ther, she alone was saved from the decree 
of death, wliicli by sin entered into this world 
and made all the children of Eve, except Mary, 
children of wrath. 

The same dignity exempted her from all 
actual sin. She alune had no need of saying : 
^' Eurgive us our trespasses nhe alone was not 
deceived, and could say, witliout wounding 
truth, that she had no sin, that unlike the rest 
of the just, she never fell. Who does not see 
that all these singular privileges entitle her to 
a special regard and honor, which is not due to 
other men or women here below. 

Mary had, in her maternity, a double title 
to the love of her Son. In all other instances 
the father holds the iirst,and leading rank, and 
the love of the child is necessarilv divided be- 
tween the father and the mother ; but in this 
instance, the mother alone, has a claim to the 
undivided love of her Son. Iso man shares 
with her the privilege. She conceived, indeed, 
in a supernatural manner, but she contiibuted, 
likewise, as secondary cause, to the foiTuation 
of that sacred Bodv, which was to be immo- 



OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY. 467 

lated on tlie Altar of the Cross, for the sins of 
the world. Who can tell the secrets of their 
mntaal love ! Imagine all you have ever read 
of the fondness of a mother for her child, and 
of a child for its mother. Picture to yourselt 
the kind words that are spoken, the loving 
smiles that are exchanged, the tender caresses, 
the embraces, that are bestowed, the fond en- 
dearments that pass between a loving child and 
mother, and even then you cannot form a cor- 
rect idea of the affection which existed between 
Mary and her darling Child. No ! To un- 
derstand the fulness of their mutual love, you 
should penetrate the secret of their hearts. 
Mary, the purest of mothers ; Jesus, the most 
loving of men ! Oh ! how those loving hearts 
beat together ! How pulse answers to pulse, 
throb to throb, sigh to sigh, joy to joy, while 
the heart of the Son rested under the heart of 
His Mother. There was no sensuality, no car- 
nal feeling in the affection of either the Son or 
the Mother. It was more than angelical — it 
was divine. In a word, it was the love of a 
Mother for her God, and the love of a God for 
His mother. 

No wonder, therefore, that the incarnate 
Word should continue to show, by His exam- 
ple, the same deference to Mary, which, as the 



ICS 



ON THE nOXOPw IXVOCATION 



AVord of the Father, He exliibited to her, long 
before lie chose lier as Ilis Mother. 

We read of Him, that after having been 
found in the temple, and liaving retm^ned to 
Ills earthly liome, in Nazareth, He ^\'as sub 
ject to Mary, and to Joseph. Submission im 
plies respect, lienor, and obedience. Jesus 
therefore, respected, lionored, and obeyed His 
mother through thirty long years. Eespect is 
outward, as well as inward. Honor sincerely 
bestowed is felt inwardly. Jesus, then, re- 
spected, and honored Mary in all those ways in 
which inferiors love to show their respect and 
honor to their superiors. What forbids our 
supposing, that Jesus did towards His mother 
Avhat dutiful children are wont to do, when 
they manifest their feelings of respect and 
deference to their parents ? What forbids our 
supposing, that He saluted her after the 
fashion of the Eastern nations, by prostrating 
Himself before her ? What forbade his giving 
her precedence in the presence of others; ask- 
ing her consent to do those things, which good 
children generally do not undertake without 
the leave of their parents ? What, if like other 
pious childi'en, when occasion required, He 
asked His mothers blessing? Suppose an 
artist, like St. Luke, had given Him a copy of 



OF THE BLESSED YIKGIN MARY. 4:69 

her portrait, would He indignantly have re- 
fused to accept, and keep the same ? Would 
He have refused to kiss it with filial affection ? 
"\Ye beg leave to differ from those, who, in 
their antagonism to Mary, would entertain the 
doubt. Jesus was the Son of Mary, and the 
best son that the best of mothers ever had. 

Why, then, do you blame the Church, and 
her children, for doing what Mary's Son, ac- 
cording to the dictates of common sense, Him- 
self did during His lifetime at Nazareth? 
Why will you not allow us to kneel before her, 
and ask her blessing ? Why do you oppose 
the making, the keeping, and the honoring of 
her portraits, and her statues ? Why do you 
deem it an insult to her Son, to pray to His 
mother, that through her intercession, we may 
obtain benefits and favors? Has she less 
power over her Son, now in Heaven, than 
when she was on earth ? Who has never felt 
the influence of a mother over the hearts of her 
children ? 

We all know how great her power was on 
earth. You remember having read of her 
visit to her cousin, Elizabeth ! Having learned 
fi'om the Archangel Gabriel, that this holy 
woman had conceived a son, in her old age, 
Mary rose up, and went into the hill-country, 
40 



470 



ON TOE IIONOK AND INVOCATION 



with great baste, into a city of Juda, and she 
entered into the house of Zacharv, and sahited 
Elizabeth. And it came to i^ass, that when 
EHzabeth lieard the sahitatiun ut Marv, tlie in- 
fant leaped in her womb. And Elizabeth was 
filled with the Holy Ghost : and she cried out 
with a loud voice, and said : Blessed art thou 
among women, and bh'.-sed is tlie fruit of thy 
womb. And whence is this to me, that the 
mother uf my Lord should come to me ? For, 
behold, as soon as the voice of thy salutation 
sounded in my ears, the infiint in my womb 
leaped with joy.'' (Luke, i. 39, etc.) 

According to the testimony of the Holy 
Ghost Himself, the first miracle in the order 
of grace took place through the instrumentality 
of Mary. For it is the opinion of many learned 
Fathers and Doctors of the Church, that St. 
John, the Baptist, was at that instant sanctified 
in his mother's bosom. And this seems reason- 
able, when we reflect that he leaped with 
conscious joy at the sound of Mary's salutation, 
at a time, when such consciousness cannot be 
but the result of a miraculous interposition of 
divine Providence. 

As in the order of grace, so the first miracle 
in the order of nature, was wi'ought by the in- 
tercessory power of Mary. We are told by 



OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MAEY. 



471 



St. John that " there was a marriage in Cana 
of Galilee, and the mother of Jesns was there. 
And Jesns also was invited, and his disciples, 
to the marriage. And the wine failing, the 
Mother of Jesns saith to Him : They have no 
wine. And Jesus saith to her: Woman, what 
is to Me and to thee? My hour is not 
yet come. His mother saith to the waiters : 
Whatsoever He shall say to yon, do ye. ITow, 
there were set there six waterpots of stone, 
according to the manner of the pnrifying of 
the Jews, containing two or three measures a 
piece. J esns saith to them : Fill the waterpots 
with water. And they filled them np to the 
brhn. And Jesus saith to them: Draw out 
now, and carry to the chief steward of the feast. 
And they carried it." (John, ii. 1-8.) And 
what did the chief steward find upon tasting 
the water? He found it changed to wine. 
At whose request ? At the request of Mary 
the mother of Jesus. Under what circumstan- 
ces ? When His hour was not yet come ; that 
is to say: when, according to the ordinary 
course of His divine Providence, He Himself, 
without the request of His mother, would not 
have wrought the miracle. And observe the 
confidence of Mary in her son's goodness and 
filial piety. Apparently, His answer is dis- 



472 ON THE nONOR AND INVOCATION 



respectful. ''What is to Me and to tliee, 
woman ? " lie calls her woman instead of 
mother. But as Lloomfield, the learned Prot- 
estant commentator, remarks : " This word 
was a form of addrgss which implied nothing 
of disrespect, and was employed by our Lord 
on tlie most aflecting of all occasions, and 
when lie especially evinced His exquisite sym- 
pathy and tender regard fur this very parent." 
Or, as St. Augustine remarks : To indicate 
to her, that in divine operations, He did not 
recognize maternal authority." 

She understood the character of her Bon, 
despite the apparent harshness of His words, 
and felt confident that, for her sake, He would 
he willing to do, what otherwise He would 
not have done. Has Mary less influence over 
her son, now that both are in heaven, than 
when they were sojourners on earth ? Who 
dares assert this paradox? What wonder is it, 
therefore, that Catholics, who understand the 
relations which Mary bears to Jesus, and who 
have learned their respective characters, should 
have such unbounded confidence in her power- 
ful intercession? 

" But you make more of her than of the re- 
deemer. Ton worship her as a goddess ; you 
caU more frequently upon her than upon her 



OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MAEY. 473 

Son. In lier litany yon bestow extravagant 
titles npon her, and, in general, yonr orators 
enlogize her more frequently, and more feel- 
ingly, than they do the Saviour of the world." 

God forbid that we should compare the 
worth of Mary with that of Jesns. "We know, 
that however exalted she may be above all 
other creatures, she yet stands at an infinite 
distance from her divine Son. Listen to the 
answer which St. Epiphanius made to the Col- 
lyridians, who gave undue honor to the Virgin 
Mary : " Her body I own, was holy, but she 
was not God. She continued a virgin, but she 
is not proposed for our adoration ; she herselt 
adoring Him, who, having descended from 
heaven, and the bosom of His Father, was born 
of her flesh. Against this error the Gospel 
itself has guarded us, saying (John, uli supra)^ 

Woman, what is to thee and to Me ? My 
hour is not yet come." He calls her woman, 
lest any one should imagine that she was of 
some superior nature. Though, therefore, she 
was a chosen vessel, and endowed with emi- 
nent sanctity, still she is a woman, partaking 
of our common nature, but deservuig of the 
hisrhest honors shown to the Saints of God. 
She stands before them all, on account of the 
heavenly mystery accomplished in her. But 
40^ 



474 ON THE nOXOR AND INTOCATION 



we adore no saint, and as tliis worship is not 
given ^o angels, mucli le^5 can it be allowed to 
the daughter of Ann. Let Mary, therefore, be 
honored, but the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, 
be adored. Let no one adore Mary." (Adv- 
Collyridianos IIa?r. lix.) Does this suffice to 
convince you that we are not ^[ai'iolaters, or 
Mary worshippers ? 

It is true that we call upon her very often; 
but in a difierent way from that in which we 
address her Son. AVe call upon Mary to inter- 
cede, to pray for us ; we call upon her Son to 
obtain a favorable answer to our petitions. 
There are even natural motives for these fre- 
quent calls upon the goodness and power of 
Mary. The tenderness of woman's nature, the 
sympathy which she feels for miser}', the 
readiness with which she succors, especially 
when her nature is unmarred by prejudice or 
passion, instinctively induce the child to have 
recourse to his mother for those very favors 
which it is only in the Father's i:)Ower to be- 
stow. Moreover, we know the influence of a 
vu'tuous woman over a virtuous man's heart. 
We know that she seldom, if ever, pleads in 
vain. Our countrymen ought to be the very 
last to object to this reasonable and natural 
practice of their Eoman Catholic fellow-citizens. 



OP THE BLESSED YIEGIN MARY. 475 



What is more common among iis, than to 
make use of woman's mediatory influence to 
obtain certain results, wliicli men do not liope 
to realize by the means of the highest genius 
or talent? It is not that we doubt either the 
power or the good will of the Son, to grant 
our petitions. No, far be it from us to enter- 
tain so heretical, so blasphemous an opinion. 
But like the servants of the marriage feast in 
Cana, although they might have addressed 
themselves first to Jesus, we address ourselves 
to His Mother, as the most certain means of 
obtaining what we desire. We know our sin- 
fulness and our unworthiness, we know that 
^' the countenance of the Lord is against them 
that do evil things," but that " His eyes are 
upon the just, and His ears unto their prayers 
(Ps. xxxiii. 16, 17) ; we know that, as one of 
the conditions of being heard, we must abide 
in Jesus Christ, and His words must abide in 
us (John, XV. 7), that om^ heart must not re- 
prehend us, in order to have confidence in 
God, and that whatsoever we shall ask we 
shall receive of Him, if we keep His command- 
ments, and do those things which are pleasing 
in His sight. (1 John, iii. 20, 21.) But alas ! 
who of us fulfills all these conditions of an 
eflScacious prayer? "We know, on the other 



476 ON THE HONOR AND INVOCATION 



hand, tliat " the continual prayer of a just man 
availetli mucli " (James, v. 16), and that Mary 
is full of grace, and blessed among all otlier 
women ; consequently that her prayer m our 
behalf is certain to be licard, inasmuch as it 
is the prayer of Jesus' ever pure, holy and 
immaculate Mother. 

As to the various titles which we besto^^* 
upnn her in o:ir prayers, and, in particular, in 
the litany recited in her honor, which of them 
all transcends, in praise or eulogy, that which 
Elizabeth by divine inspiration bestowed upon 
her, when she called her the Mother of her 
Lord, or which the Holy Ghost lavishes upon 
her, when He so often calls her the Mother of 
Jesus ? Select a few specimens : Holy Mary !" 
Is not she holy, whom the spirit of sanctity 
proclaims full of grace ?" " Mother of divine 
grace TTas she not the i)arent of Him, whom 
St. John calls "full of graced' (John, i. 14.) 
" Most pure Mother I'' "Was she not the purest 
of mortals, who was conceived without sin, 
and was she not chaste, who remained a Vii'- 
gin after she had become a Mother? "Mir- 
ror of justice !" Was it not she who reflected 
the light of the just, the Holy one, who was 
born of her flesh ? " Seat of wisdom !" Did 
not incai'uate wisdom repose during nine 



OP THE BLESSED YIKGIN MAKT. 477 

months in her womb ? " Honorable, spiritual 
vessel!'^ "Who but she carried the precious 
treasure beneath her mother's heart ? " Ves- 
sel of devotion!" Was she not the devoted 
mother who followed her Son to Calvary, and 
heroically took her stand beneath the igno- 
minious cross ? " Mystical rose !" "Was she 
not the root of Jesse, out of which a flower 
was to rise up ? (Is. xi. 1.) "Was she not the 
" Tower of David," the mother of that 'King who 
swayed the nations from the cross, and "Ark 
of the covenant," who bore not only the law 
but the lawgiver Himself? " Queen of An- 
gels," — by which of God's angels was it ever 
said : " Thou art my son ; this day have 1 be- 
gotten thee ?" Mary could say to the King of 
angels : " This day I have conceived Thee and 
brought Thee forth." " Queen of patriarchs !" 
After whom did they sigh, when they asked 
the clouds to rain down the "Just One?" 
"Whose son did Abraham long to see, if it was 
not the son of Mary ? " Queen of prophets !" 
The chief burden of their oracles was the Mes- 
siah, His coming. His suffering, death, and 
glorious resmTection, His spiritual power over 
the nations. His kingdom that would have no 
end; and the Virgin who would bring forth 
that mighty king. "Queen of Apostles!" 



478 ON TnE HONOE AND INVOCATION 



Was it not Marj, tliat gave birtli to Ilirn, who 
afterwards said : " All power is given to Me 
in heaven and on earth, going, therefore, teach 
all nations?" (Matt, xxviii. IS.) Was it not 
her free will, which chose Ilim for a son, who 
afterwards chose the twelve, and sent tliem 
that they might bring forth fruit, and that their 
fruit might remain? (John, xv. IG.) What 
made the martyr's blood so fruitful as the seed 
of new Christians, if not the blood of Christ, 
whose blood was the blood of Mary ? " Queen 
of Virgins," — was she indeed, who, after a^ 
before tlie birth of her Son, remained a Virgin. 
In fine, " Queen of all saints," — who gave to the 
world the ''Saint of saints," and opened to it 
the fountain-head of all sanctity. 

Does not the woman blessed among all 
others deserve the hiirhest eulo^^ies and enco- 
miums from orators, the sweetest lyrics from 
poets? Should not sculpture love to chise) 
her matchless form, and painters to portray 
her peerless graces ? We do not wonder, there- 
fore, that even Protestant writers should have 
felt inspu'ed to sing this lovely Virgin's praise. 
^Lnd that in quest of the beautiful in human 
nature, they should have fixed upon her as 
their ideal, and exclaimed with the meditative 
Wordsworth : 



OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MAEY. 479 

Woman ! above all women glorified I 
Our tainted nature's solitary boast ! 
Purer than foam on central ocean tost, 
Fairer than Eastern skies, at sunset strewn 
With fancied roses." 

No, the wonder with us is not that Catholics 
are so lavish of their eulogies of Mary, but that 
tliose who call themselves Christians, and own 
Mary as the Mother of Jesus, should be so 
chary of their encomiums and panegyrics, 
when there is question of the Yirgin, 

The ministers of those Christian sects love 
to dwell upon the characters of the women of 
the Old Testament. They discourse eloquent- 
ly on Rachel, Eebecca, Ann, the mother of 
Samuel ; Miriam, the sister of Moses ; Euth, 
Esther, and Judith. Elizabeth, Anna the 
prophetess, Mary Magdalen, Martha, can win 
their admiration, and rouse their souls to a 
sacred enthusiasm but when there is question 
of Mary, the Mother of their Saviour, their 
courage and their eloquence fail them, and 
their heart grows faint, in the fear lest every 
sound of praise in honor of Mary, be a reflec- 
tion cast upon her Son. The audience share 
the scruples of the speaker. They are thrilled 
with horror, when from pulpit or platform 
they hear her name. What minister would 



480 nil- noN(^R and invocation 

dare salute lier a.^ Gahriel did, or, in tho 
eloquent prayers which Sabbath after Sabbath 
he addresses to the throne of grace, would ven- 
ture to miiiLde those sweet words of inspiration : 
''Hail, thou highly favored, the Lord is with 
thee, blessed art thou among women, and 
blessed is the fruit of thy womb?'' His hear- 
ers would deem him a papist or a madman, if 
lie attempted it. And yet these men boast of 
pure Christianity, and charge the Koman Cath- 
olic Church with Mariolatr}', i\s if the Arch- 
angel Gabriel, i\s if inspired Elizabeth, as if tho 
lloly Ghost, as if God llimsehf were abhorred 
and detested worshippers of Mar}' ? Who does 
not see the absurdity of such hypocrisy ! Sup- 
pose that you were living in the days of Mary, 
and were her neighbor. Suppose, further, that 
you knew then, iis you know now, that Jesus 
is the Son of Mary, and she His Mother, would 
you have any scruple to go to her dwelling 
and to say to her, as follows : " Mary, Mother 
of niy Saviour, I am a poor, a miserable sinner. 
I know that my course of life displeases thy 
beloved Son, my Redeemer. Please be so 
kind as to ask Him to grant me the grace of 
being a good, a virtuous man ; a good, a holy 
woman.'' AVe are sure that in so doing, you 
would not consider yom^self superstitious, nor 



OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MART. 481 

a worsMpper of Mary. Why have you any 
scruple to do the same now that she is in 
Heaven. For you doubt not but Jesus has 
taken Mary up to Heaven ; you doubt not but 
.He has placed her on a throne next to Him- 
self. Would He allow any saint to have pre- 
cedence of His mother ? Are you afraid that 
she cannot hear you? We have already an- 
swered that difficulty, in our lecture on the 
invocation of saints. What then are you afraid 
of? That she is less kind, less charitable than 
you would suppose her to have been on earth ? 
But charity is perfected, not diminished, in the 
kingdom of God. Oh ! then, address yourself 
to Mary. If you dare not join in our prayers, 
salute her at least, in the words of your inspired 
Bible, say to her with the Archangel, " Hail, 
full of grace (or, Thou highly favored), the 
Lord is with Thee, blessed art thou among 
women and with her inspired cousin : "And 
blessed is the fruit of thy womb" (Jesus) ; and 
we promise you, you will love Mary as we do ; 
and you will experience, as all of us do, her 
powerful intercession. 

Besides the general objection to the honor 
and love we exhibit towards the mother of our 
Redeemer, some of our separated brethren take 
delight in underrating the excellence of Mary, 
41 



483 



ON THE noNon asd dtv'ocation 



by dwelling on those Scripture texts in Tvhicb 
mention is made of the brethren and sisters of 
Jesus, as if the ever chaste and Immaculate 
Virgin had been tlie mother of other children 
besides her Only Begotten. 

True, we often read of the brethren, and oi 
the .-i-sters of Jesus. Thus (Matt. xii. 40) : 

JJchold, His motlier and His brethren stood 
without." (See also, Mark, iii. 31 ; Luke, viii. 
19.) And again : " Is not this the carpenter'3 
Son ? Is not His mother called Mary, and Ilia 
brethren, James, and Joseph, and Simon, and 
Jude ? And llis sisters, are thej not all with 
us (Matt. xiii. 55, 50.) They are also men- 
tioned in John, vii. 3, 5 ; Acts, i. 14 ; 1 Cor. 
ix. 5 ; Gal. i. 19. 

St. Augustine asks : " Had our Lord breth- 
ren ? Did Mary brin'^ forth other children ? 
Far from us be the thought ; for, with her the 
dignity of Virgins took its rise. . . . Ilead the 
Scriptures, and you will find tliat the uncle 
and sisters son are called brothers ; and having 
this usage present to your mind, you will per- 
ceive why all the relati\ies of Mary are styled 
the brothers of Clii'ist. . . . ^hen you hear 
of the brethren of the Lord, think of the 
kindred of Mary, not of any children 01 
hers : for, as in the tomb where the bodj 



OF THE BLESSED YIEGIN MAEY. 483 

of the Lord was placed, no one was laid be- 
fore or afterwards, so the womb of Mary, 
neither before nor afterwards, conceived any 
thing mortal." (Kenrick on St. John, ch. ii. 
and vii.) 

It is well known, that the Jews and the 
Greeks often i\sed the words, "brother and 
sister-' to express relationship merely; and 
this is the case with the Evangelists and Apos- 
tles, when they speak of the brethren of om' 
Lord. In St. Matt, xxvii. 56, we read of Mary 
Magdalen, Mary, the mother of James, and 
Joseph (or Joses, as St. Jerome calls him), and 
the mother of the sons of Zebedee. In St. 
Mark (xv. 40) we also read of a Mary who was 
the mother of James the Less, and of Joseph 
(Joses). In St. John (xix. 25) we read : " Now 
there stood by the cross of Jesus, His mother, 
and His mother's sister, Mary of Cleophas." 
James and Joseph, or Joses, were the sons of 
Mary of Cleophas, or Clopas. ISTow, as this 
Mary was the sister of the Mother of Jesns, 
James and Joses, therefore, were cousins, and 
from this relationship, the two latter are called 
the brethren of om' Lord. 

St. Jude the Apostle calls himself servant 
of Jesus Christ, and brother of James. This 
Jude was also called Judas Thaddeus, and is 



4S4 ON THE nONOF. AND IXVOCATTON 



styled by St. Lnkc, tlic brother of JaTne3 
(vi. 10). St. Jiidc, then, bears the same rela- 
tionsliip to Jesii.-, as is borne by his l)rother 
James of Alpheiis. I3ut Alpheus and Clopag 
are the same names, according to the learned 
commentators on the subject, such as Light- 
foot, Gesenius, and otliers. Jiide and Jesus, 
t]ieref«>r(\ ^vere first cousin?, (»n the maternal 
side. 

The fourth brother of the Lord is called 
Simon. Accordini: to Ileircsippus, whose testi- 
mony is given by Eusebius (Lib. iii., Hist. G., 
ii.), he was another son of Clopas, or Alpheus, 
and of ^lary, the sister of the mother of our 
Ivodeemer, and consequently, bore the same re- 
lationship to Jesus as did James, Joses, and 
Jude. 

As to the sisters of Jesus, we are told that 
Salome and the Mary mentioned in Matt, 
xxviii. 1., were the daughters of Clopas, or Al- 
pheus, and of Mary, the mother of James and 
Joses ; so that they were, likewise, the cousins 
of Jesus. 

There are other opinions among the Fathers 
and doctors of the Chmx-h, on the degrees of 
relationship existing between the so-called 
brethren and sisters of the Lord and our 
Saviour; but none, save the wicked heretic 



OF THE BLESSED TIEGIIT MARY. 485 

Helvidiiis, and Ms followers, during the last 
three hundred years, have been so daring as to 
suppose that Mary had any other than her " first 
born Son," Jesus. (Luke, x. 7.) Some sup- 
pose that Mary, the mother of James and 
Joses, and Mary the mother of Jesus were not 
uterine sisters, but only cousins. They pro- 
ceed on the supposition, that Clopas was not 
the husband, but the father of Mary the 
mother of James and Joses, and that Clopas 
and St. Joseph, the foster-father of Jesus, were 
brothers. On that hypothesis, there would be 
no consanguinity between them, but only a re- 
lationship, resulting from the fact, that the 
foster-father of Jesus was the brother of Clopas, 
who w^as the father of Mary, of James, and 
Joses. Whatever opinion we adopt, it will al- 
ways remain proved, that Mary was a Virgin, 
after, as well as before she conceived and 
brought forth her divine Son. In conclusion, 
allow us to say to you, whatever you be, if 
you cannot, like us, love the mother of your 
Eedeemer, cease, at least, to revile and insult 
her. As every mark of respect and honor 
shown to a parent redounds on the child, so 
every affront and insult offered to Mary, re- 
dounds on her Son. How can Jesus honor 
those w^ho calumniate His mother? How 
41- 



486 



ON THE nOXOE AXD INVOCATION 



can lie confess tliem before His Father, who 
were ashamed to confess the dignity, the ex- 
cellence, the greatness of His mother, before 
men ! 

We have a solemn duty to perform towards 
Mary. Xext to God, next to Jesus, she has 
done more for us than any creature on earth, 
or in heaven, could possibly do. She gave us 
tlie price of our ransom ; by her mediation we 
were delivered from sin and from hell ; for she 
gave us Ilim who triumphed over both in the 
Hesh, which He received from her. She 
opened to us the gates of a better paradise 
than that which our first mother Eve was the 
occasion of closing against us. O Mary, mother 
of Jesus, pray for us ! Pray for those who sit 
in darkness and the shadow of death. Pray 
for those that hate you, that they may learn to 
love yon as you deserve to be loved. Pray for 
om- countrymen and countrywomen, many of 
whom neither know you nor the blessed fruit 
of your womb, Jesus. Pray for those who 
know and love yon, that they may daily love 
you more and more. Pray for us, dear 
Mother, that we may know and love you so 
as to spread the love of you among all those 
who shall come to hear, or read your praises. 
Pray for us, that having fought the good 



OF THE BLESSED YIKG-m MARY. 487 

fight for Jesus, your Son, and for you. His 
mother, we may obtain the reward, which of 
all others we cherish most, namely, to praise 
and love you and your Jesus, for ever in the 
Kingdom of Heaven. Amen. 



TlIE Em). 



/ 



... V 



,0' . • ' ' • • o 



.0' 



* . ^ Deacidifieo using the Bookkeeper process 

^J"^* ^ Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 

" . ' ^ ■ ^ ' Treatment Date: Jan 2006 

c ^ PreservatlonTechnologies 

^ ^ « *^ A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESCRVATIOW 

'^J- .JP" : 1 1 Thomson Park Dr ve 

^ . -1 • Cranberry Tovwiship, PA 16066 

«0 ' • (724> 779-21 n 



